Back
MAUNA M. BHATT
Kanaksinh Madhavsinh Ravalji – Appellant
Versus
State Of Gujarat – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. The captioned writ petitions are filed challenging penalty order dated 05.11.2019, passed by respondent No.2 (Disciplinary Authority), wherein Disciplinary Authority has decided to deduct an amount of Rs. 500/- from pension of each of the petitioners for a period of six months.
2. Since all these petitioners, at the relevant time were serving as Additional Assistant Engineer with the State of Gujarat and for similar charges, were inflicted with same penalty, all these petitions are heard and decided together by this common judgment and order. For the sake of convenience, the facts referred in Special Civil Application No.1504 of 2020 are considered for the purpose of adjudication of the petitions.
Rule returnable forthwith. Mr. Sahil Trivedi, Ld. AGP waives service of Rule.
3. Facts in brief, are as under:
The petitioner was serving as Additional Assistant Engineer with Narmada and Water Resources, Water Supply and Kalpsar Department, Government of Gujarat since 1979 and on attaining the age of superannuation, retired in year 2015. The petitioner was subjected to a departmental inquiry along with 35 other co-delinquents for an alleged incident of the year 1992-94. The char
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the scope of judicial review in disciplinary proceedings is limited, and the High Court shall not reappreciate the evidence or interfere with ....
The Court's limited jurisdiction under Article 226 in interfering with the quantum of punishment and the application of the principle of parity in punishment.
Disciplinary authorities are the sole judges of evidence during inquiries, and judicial review is limited to procedural fairness and not the merits of the findings.
In disciplinary proceedings, the authority imposing penalties must adhere to procedural fairness, including providing reasons for differing from an inquiry officer's findings and allowing the employe....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for equal treatment of delinquents in disciplinary proceedings and the adverse impact of delay in concluding disciplinary actions, ....
The central legal point established in the judgment is that disciplinary proceedings must be conducted in a timely manner, and the imposition of penalties after the retirement of the petitioner is co....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
