Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) KOHIMA BENCH
KARDAK ETE
Arup Das S/o Sri Jagarnath Das – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to disciplinary action based on accident and subsequent mental health issues. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. detailing the inquiry procedures and resultant penalties imposed on the petitioner. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. allegations of procedural violations during disciplinary inquiry. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 12) |
| 4. respondent's contention regarding conduct of inquiry and evidence of guilt. (Para 15 , 17 , 18) |
| 5. judicial determination of procedural adherence and implications on disciplinary outcomes. (Para 19 , 35) |
| 6. clarifying statutory procedures in disciplinary proceedings as per existing rules. (Para 31 , 32 , 36 , 39 , 40) |
| 7. final ruling on the dismissal appeal and validation of disciplinary processes. (Para 41 , 42) |
Judgment & Order :
KARDAK ETE, J.
Heard Mr. K. Paul and Mr. J.P. Chauhan, learned counsels, for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K.K. Parasar, learned CGC, for the respondents.
2. By filing this writ petition, the petitioner has put to challenge the order dated 16.01.2016, passed by the Commandant, 221 Bn. CRPF, by which the petitioner has been imposed penalty of removal from service w.e.f. 16.01.2016 and also the appellate order dated 08.07.2016 passed by the DIGP (R
Adequate opportunity for defense in disciplinary inquiry is essential; however, failure to contest charges undermines claims of procedural violations.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the respondents followed the provisions of the CRPF Act and Rules in conducting the inquiry and imposing the punishment on the petitioner.
The absence of Presenting Officers in disciplinary proceedings violates natural justice, necessitating the setting aside of dismissal orders and reinstatement of affected personnel.
The court emphasized the importance of following the prescribed disciplinary procedures and upheld the principle of proportionality in imposing penalties for misconduct.
Proportionality of punishment and adherence to prescribed procedures in disciplinary proceedings.
The non-appointment of a presenting officer in a departmental enquiry vitiates the enquiry and violates the principle of natural justice.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of evidence to prove charges in a disciplinary proceeding, the need for adherence to natural justice principles, and the entitle....
The court upheld the disciplinary action against the petitioner for unauthorized absence, finding no procedural irregularities and confirming the penalty of removal from service as justified.
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
