Back
ANANDA SEN
Kamlesh Dubey S/o Shri Babu Lal Dubey – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
ANANDA SEN, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondents.
2. Petitioner in W.P. (S) No. 329 of 2017 has challenged the order contained in Memo No. 1031/Go. dated 01.06.2016, whereby he has been dismissed from service after conclusion of a departmental enquiry. He has also challenged the order contained in Memo No. 1570/Go. dated 07.10.2016 passed by the Appellate Authority the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Santhal Paragana Range, Dumka, whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner has been dismissed.
Petitioner in W.P. (S) No. 330 of 2017 has challenged the order contained in Memo No. 1037/Go. dated 01.06.2016 by which he has been dismissed after conclusion of departmental enquiry. He has also challenged the order contained in Memo No. 1572/Go. dated 07.10.2016 passed by the Appellate Authority-Deputy Inspector General of Police, Santhal Paragana Range, Dumka, whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner has been dismissed.
3. Two departmental proceedings were initiated under two different memos against the petitioners for misconduct, committed jointly by them. Charge against both the petitioners are that on 28.11.2005, bot
The court emphasized the limited scope of judicial review in departmental proceedings, the principles of natural justice, and the requirement for proportionate punishment in disciplinary cases, espec....
The limited scope of interference by the High Court in departmental proceedings and the evaluation of the decision-making process in disciplinary proceedings.
The punishment imposed in a disciplinary proceeding should not shock the conscience of the court and should be proportionate to the proven charge.
The distinction between criminal acquittal and departmental proceedings is crucial; acquittal does not imply innocence in disciplinary contexts, and the standard of proof in disciplinary matters is l....
In departmental proceedings, the standard of proof is based on the preponderance of probabilities, and the court will not interfere with the disciplinary authority's findings unless there is a clear ....
The main legal point established is that subsequent acquittal in a criminal case does not invalidate a completed departmental proceeding, and the court's jurisdiction under Article 226 in departmenta....
The High Court does not act as an appellate authority in disciplinary matters and will not interfere with the quantum of punishment unless it is shocking to the conscience.
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
