Back
SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI
Sumit Lal Dey, S/o. Sri Samiran Chandra Dey – Appellant
Versus
State of Assam, Rep. by the Principal Secretary to the Govt. of Assam Home Deptt. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sanjay Kumar Medhi, J.
Imposition of a penalty of stoppage of 3 increments with cumulative effect in a disciplinary proceeding which was affirmed in the departmental appeal is the subject matter of challenge in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
2. As per the facts projected, the petitioner was working as a Constable (UB) and relating to an incident of theft of a departmental motorcycle which was in his custody, a disciplinary proceeding was initiated. It is the case of the petitioner that relating to the said incident of theft, he had lodged an FIR on 03.01.2015 and thereafter, a show cause notice was issued to him on 25.01.2015. The said notice was replied to by the petitioner on 06.02.2015 and being dissatisfied, an inquiry was initiated. The inquiry culminated in a report in which, the allegations against the petitioner were found to be substantiated. Accordingly, on 06.05.2015, the second show cause notice was issued to the petitioner which he had replied on 15.05.2015. Thereafter, the impugned order dated 22.05.2015 was issued imposing the penalty of stoppage of 3 increments with cumulative effect. The petitioner had preferred a departmental
The Court affirmed that a show cause notice can initiate disciplinary proceedings if it meets the procedural requirements outlined in the relevant rules.
The court affirmed that a penalty classified as minor does not require a full inquiry, and the procedural requirements for imposing such penalties were adequately met.
Disciplinary proceedings must adhere to procedural fairness and prescribed rules, and penalties not explicitly stated in the governing rules cannot be imposed.
Necessity of framing definite charges in Departmental Proceedings and distinctness of allegations in different Show Cause Notices
The acquittal in a criminal case does not invalidate disciplinary proceedings, which require a lower standard of proof, and the Limitation Act does not apply to such proceedings.
Disciplinary authority's discretion under CISF Rules allows for minor penalties without mandatory inquiry, provided no gross illegality or violation of natural justice occurs.
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....
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
