Back
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD
Vijay Praveen Baxla (husband) – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
I.A. No. 3486 of 2023
The instant interlocutory application has been filed for substitution of the petitioner, namely, Namita Nalini Baxla @ Namita Nalini Minz, who has died in course of pendency of the writ petition.
2. It has been submitted that the writ petitioner, namely, Namita Nalini Baxla @ Namita Nalini Minz has died leaving behind her legal heirs as referred at paragraph 5 to the instant application as such prayer has been made that the instant Interlocutory Application may be allowed since the right to sue still survives.
3. There is no objection on behalf of the State.
4. Considering the reason assigned in the instant interlocutory application, the same is allowed.
5. Office is directed to make necessary correction in the cause title of the writ petition as per the details furnished at paragraph 5 of the instant interlocutory application.
6. Accordingly, the instant interlocutory application stands disposed of.
W.P. (S) No. 6697 of 2014
7. The instant writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing order as contained in Memo No. 2129 dated 28.02.2014 by which punishment of four annual increment with cumulative effect has been in
A disciplinary authority must provide an opportunity for hearing when it disagrees with an enquiry officer's findings, and any punishment not prescribed by statutory rules is without jurisdiction.
The court emphasized the necessity of adhering to principles of natural justice in disciplinary inquiries, asserting that findings must be supported by adequate evidence and fair procedures.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the limited scope of interference in disciplinary proceedings, emphasizing the need for evidence-based findings and the principles of proportionali....
Natural justice requires meaningful opportunity for defense in disciplinary inquiries; failure to adhere justifies annulment of punitive orders.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of following the principles of natural justice in disciplinary proceedings, including giving the delinquent officer an opportunity t....
The High Court can interfere with the quantum of punishment if it is found to be disproportionate to the gravity of the offence, but must assign reasons for finding the punishment to be shocking to i....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that courts can only interfere with disciplinary proceedings if there are violations of principles of natural justice or statutory regulations, and....
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
