Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
AJAY MOHAN GOEL
Mahender Kumar Mahajan – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition challenges censure penalty, seeks retrospective promotion (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. petitioner alleges procedural flaws; respondents defend admitted guilt (Para 6 , 7) |
| 3. censure upheld as lenient response to admitted absence (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. appellate order affirmed for disobedience of orders (Para 12 , 13) |
| 5. no retrospective promotion without exoneration; petition dismissed (Para 14 , 15 , 16) |
JUDGMENT :
AJAY MOHAN GOEL, J.
1. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has, inter alia, prayed for the following reliefs:-
“1. To issue writ in the nature of certiorari to quash impugned penalty Annexure P/25 ANNEXURE P/29 & ANNEXURE P/30.
2. That the respondents may further be commanded by issuing writ in the nature of mandamus to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion from the date juniors have been promoted as Senior Assistant and further as Superintendent Grade-II, with all consequential benefits.”
2. Brief facts necessary for the adjudication of this petition are that disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the petitioner, which finally culminated into order dated 20.12.2019 (Annexure P/25), passed by the Disciplinary Authority,
Admission of guilt in disciplinary proceedings resulting in censure penalty, without exoneration, bars challenge to penalty and entitlement to retrospective promotion despite juniors' promotion durin....
Point of law: doctrine of laches in courts of equity is not an arbitrary or technical doctrine. Where it would be practically unjust to give a remedy either because the party has, by his conduct done....
The main legal point established is that 'Censure' punishment does not warrant the imposition of check periods for promotion, and surcharge proceedings should not automatically disqualify an individu....
Disciplinary actions must be supported by clear reasoning; failure to provide reasons renders such actions invalid.
The court held that re-opening disciplinary proceedings after significant delay violated procedural rules and principles of natural justice, leading to undue prejudice against the petitioner.
Point of law: Andhra Pradesh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1991 are silent as to the exact date of initiation of disciplinary proceedings. But the proceedings prescribed ....
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
