Back
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
DEVASHIS BARUAH
Khabir Uddin Ahmed, Son Of Late Sadar Ali – Appellant
Versus
State Of Assam, Represented By The Commissioner To The Govt. Of Assam, Panchayat And Rural Development (B) Department – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
DEVASHIS BARUAH, J.
Heard Mr. J. Abedin, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner and Mr. K. Konwar, the learned Additional Advocate General as well as the Standing counsel of the P&RD Department appearing on behalf of all the Respondents.
2. The present writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner assailing the order dated 16.09.2023 by which the major penalty of compulsory retirement under Rule 7(v) of the Assam Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1964 (for short ‘the Rules of 1964) was imposed upon the Petitioner and the notification dated 26.09.2023 whereby the order dated 16.09.2023 imposing the major penalty was duly notified and given effect to.
3. The question involved in the instant writ petition is as to whether imposition of the penalty of compulsory retirement vide the order dated 16.09.2023 was in accordance with law.
4. At the outset, it is very pertinent to take note of that though the Petitioner had an alternative and efficacious remedy of preferring an appeal in terms with Rule 15 of the Rules of 1964, the Petitioner did not avail the said remedy but approached this Court. It is also very pertinent to take note of that the Petitioner ha
The court emphasized that judicial review of disciplinary actions is limited and does not permit interference with punishment unless grossly disproportionate, upholding the integrity of public servic....
Judicial review of disciplinary decisions is limited; courts cannot reconsider the nature of punishment unless found shockingly disproportionate, emphasizing the importance of discipline in sensitive....
Point of Law : Rule 56(j) of Fundamental Rules is an extension of “Doctrine of Pleasure”, If the employer - Union of India is of the opinion that no useful purpose will be served by continuing an emp....
The principle of proportionality of punishment is crucial in determining the appropriate penalty for proved charges of misconduct.
The decision to compulsorily retire a government servant under FR 56(j) must be made in public interest, and judicial scrutiny is limited to cases of mala fide exercise of power or lack of evidence. ....
The court upheld the compulsory retirement of the petitioner based on substantiated charges of negligence and misconduct in verifying loan applications, emphasizing the limited scope of judicial revi....
The court upheld the disciplinary authority's decision on compulsory retirement, emphasizing limited judicial review regarding the appropriateness of punishment imposed, unless it is found to be shoc....
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
