Back
BIREN VAISHNAV, PRANAV TRIVEDI
Ghanshyamsinh Devaji Chauhan – Appellant
Versus
State Of Gujarat – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
BIREN VAISHNAV, J.
1. Challenge in this appeal is to the oral order dated 23.02.2016 passed by the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No. 2898 of 2016. The petitioner/appellant herein who was initially appointed on 01.05.2001 on the post of Police Sub-Inspector on probation, was terminated from service by an order dated 28.04.2006. On a representation being made, by an order dated 29.09.2008, his representation was rejected. Perusal of the order of the learned Single Judge would indicate that petitioner had earlier approached this Court by filing Special Civil Application No. 14259 of 2011, which came to be disposed of on 30.01.2012, in light of the fact that the petitioner/appellant had filed a revision application before the State Government, challenging the orders of discharge.
2. We note that the Civil Application has been moved for amendment of the appeal bringing the order of rejection of revision on 19.04.2012 on record and even making that a ground for assailing the orders of discharge before us.
3. Ms. Vidhi Bhatt, learned advocate appearing for the appellant would assail the order of the learned Single Judge on the ground that though, admittedly the
The main legal point established is the distinction between discharge simplicitor and stigmatic orders, and the relevance of revisional authority's decision in such cases.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the distinction between termination simpliciter and punitive termination based on the nature of the inquiry and the purpose of the termination.
Termination of a probationary employee must follow due process, including an enquiry if misconduct is alleged; failure to conduct such an enquiry renders the termination invalid.
Where the form of the order is merely a camouflage for an order of dismissal for misconduct it is always open to the Court before which the order is challenged to go behind the form and ascertain the....
Discharge of a probationary judicial officer based on misconduct allegations without a proper inquiry violates constitutional protections, constituting punitive action and inflicting stigma.
If misconduct is the foundation to pass the order, then an enquiry into misconduct should be conducted and an action according to law should follow. But if it is (sic) notice, it is not incumbent upo....
The discharge of a probationer must comply with procedural requirements, and insufficient assessment of performance leads to implied confirmation, while discharge based on unsatisfactory work isn't p....
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
