Back
RAJESH SHANKAR
Rajendra Mahto – Appellant
Versus
Central Coalfields Limited – Respondent
ORDER :
1. The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order under Ref. No. PO/Topa/DA/Dismissal/2021/281 dated 28.06.2021 issued under the signature of the Project Officer, Topa Colliery, Ramgarh-respondent no. 4, whereby the petitioner has been dismissed from service. Further prayer has been made for quashing the order under Ref. PD/IR-L/Kuju/2021/1923 dated 16.09.2021 passed by the Director (Personnel), Central Coalfields Limited, Ranchi-respondent no. 2 (appellate authority), whereby the departmental appeal preferred by the petitioner has been dismissed. The petitioner has also prayed for issuance of direction upon the respondents to reinstate him in service and let him continue till attaining the actual date of superannuation i.e. 30.06.2021 as well as to pay the wages for the period from April, 2021 to June, 2021 after adjusting the leave due towards medical leave. It has also been prayed for issuance of direction upon the respondents to pay the post retiral benefits to the petitioner.
2. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was appointed on 03.02.1982 as a piece rated employee of CCL in lieu of acquisition of his land for Topa Pro
Dismissal from service without a fair hearing violates principles of natural justice; reopening previously settled charges is impermissible.
Dismissal without a hearing violates natural justice; a second inquiry on previously dropped charges is impermissible.
The appointment being void ab initio precludes the petitioner from claiming reinstatement and other benefits.
The dismissal of the petitioner was set aside due to procedural irregularities and violation of natural justice, entitling him to retiral benefits.
Mistakes in implementation of disciplinary proceedings do not invalidate findings against impersonation if the misconduct is substantiated. Delays in proceedings, while regrettable, do not excuse fra....
The court's decision highlighted the discretionary nature of issuing a writ under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and emphasized the limited scope for interference in disciplinary matters, u....
The rejection of benefits must be based on a proper application of mind, and disciplinary action must be conducted expeditiously with appropriate evidence.
A dismissal order may be upheld if the employee fails to assert timely challenges and does not provide credible explanations for absence or delay, aligning with principles of administrative law.
The court emphasized that disciplinary actions must obey principles of natural justice, including evidence for charges and payment of subsistence allowance during suspension; non-compliance voids san....
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
