Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
VINIT KUMAR MATHUR, BIPIN GUPTA
Union Of India, Through The Secretary – Appellant
Versus
Sohan Lal Regar, S/o. Shri Hara Ram Regar – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background of the disciplinary action against the respondent. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments presented by the union of india regarding procedural and substantive errors. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. respondent's defense regarding errors not being attributable to him. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. court's analysis on the obligations and penalties regarding the monthly income scheme. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 5. final judgment quashing the tribunal's order. (Para 21) |
Order :
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The present writ petition has been filed against the order dated 23.01.2025 passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Jodhpur Bench, Jodhpur (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Tribunal’), whereby, the Original Application filed by the respondent-Employee has been allowed.
3. Briefly noted the facts in the present writ petition are that the respondent-Employee, while working as Sub-Postmaster at Anandpur Kalu Post Office, was issued with a charge-sheet under Rule 16 of Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as ‘CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965’) with the allegation that he had closed the Monthl
Employee's failure to calculate interest according to permissible limits under the Monthly Income Scheme led to lawful disciplinary action, emphasizing the responsibility of employees in public servi....
A nominee cannot be held liable for excess interest earned on accounts operated by the deceased when the authorities failed to notify the depositor of exceeding limits during his lifetime.
Recovery of excess payments from employees in Group-C service is impermissible after five years, emphasizing fairness and justice in employment matters.
(1) Internal procedure enquiry - the depositors cannot be made to continue to suffer for the sake of an internal procedural enquiry of the petitioner.(2) Non-suited - The respondent cannot be non-sui....
Recovery of excess payments from Group-C employees is impermissible if the excess payment was made for over five years, as established in prior judgments.
Recovery of excess payments from Group-C employees beyond five years is impermissible, emphasizing equitable treatment and adherence to Supreme Court guidelines.
Recovery of excess payments from Group-C employees is impermissible after five years, ensuring equitable treatment in employment matters.
Imposing penalties without conducting an enquiry violates the principles of natural justice, making such actions illegal.
Recovery of excess payments from Group-C employees is impermissible after five years, as established in Rafiq Masih's case.
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
