Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
A.S. SUPEHIA, R.T. VACHHANI
Zonal Manager, Bank Of India – Appellant
Versus
Presiding Officer – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. legality of judicial review in departmental proceedings. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 2. final assessment of evidence and the decision on the appeal. (Para 10 , 11) |
JUDGMENT :
R.T. VACHHANI, J.
By way of the captioned LPA, the appellant – Bank challenges the CAV judgment dated 28.01.2025 passed in the captioned writ petition; whereby the said petition came to be partly allowed upholding the directions issued by the Tribunal in clause No.(i) to (iv) while quashing and setting aside the directions issued in clause (v) of the impugned award dated 12.08.2016 passed by the CGIT-cum-Labour Court, Ahmedabad (for short “Tribunal”) in Reference (CGITA) No. 45 of 2005.
2. For the sake of convenience and brevity, the parties herein, appellant would be referred to as the “Bank” and respondent No.2 as the “employee”.
FACTUAL MATRIX :-
3. Brief facts of the case are that respondent No.2-employee was appointed as an Account Clerk on 01.09.1977 in the Bank of India, Naroda Branch. On 05.03.2002, Mr. Rakesh D. Dogra, an officer working at Naroda Branch, filed a complaint against respondent No. 2-employee before the Manager, Bank of India, Naroda Branch, Ahmedabad, alleging assault and threat to his lif
The principles of natural justice mandate that departmental inquiries must provide reasonable opportunity to the employee, and the burden of proof lies with the employer to establish misconduct, foll....
The power of judicial review, of the Constitutional Courts, is an evaluation of the decision-making process and not the merits of the decision itself. It is to ensure fairness in treatment and not to....
Departmental inquiries require a preponderance of probabilities for proof, differing from the strict standards in criminal trials, and insufficient evidence can render dismissal illegal.
The standard of proof in disciplinary proceedings is based on preponderance of probabilities, and the court does not reappraise evidence unless there is a violation of natural justice.
The standard of proof in disciplinary proceedings is based on preponderance of probabilities, and courts will not interfere unless the punishment is shockingly disproportionate to the misconduct.
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
