IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SRI ANANDA SEN, J.
Shiv Shankar Choudhary S/o Late Kameshwar Choudhary – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. relief sought against departmental inquiry outcomes. (Para 1) |
| 2. overview of the case and background (Para 2 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. arguments regarding evidence and departmental proceedings (Para 3 , 4 , 8) |
| 4. court's analysis of departmental evidence standards (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 5. conclusion on reopening of the departmental case (Para 17) |
| 6. final ruling and decision of the court (Para 18 , 19) |
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
2. The petitioner in this writ application has prayed for the following reliefs:
(a) For issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction for quashing of the notification contained in memo no. Nig./Sara(Path)-01-Vi.Ka.5-172/2014 2261(S) dated 30.03.2015 (Annexure-II) issued under the signature of Deputy Secretary, Road Construction Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi, whereby and whereunder the petitioner has been awarded the following punishments:
(i) Reduction in the lowest pay scale (ii) Recovery of an amount of Rs. 36,75,467/- from the salary of the petitioner towards the loss caused to the State Exchequer.
(b) For further issuance of an appropriate writ/order/
West Bengal Central School Service Commission and Others v. Abdul Halim and Others
Aureliano Fernandes v. State of Goa
Roop Singh Negi vs. Punjab National Bank and Others
State of Uttar Pradesh and Others v. Saroj Kumar Sinha
Nirmala J. Jhala v. State of Gujarat
Amalendu Ghosh v. North Eastern Railway
Champaklal Chimanlal Shah v. Union of India
Govt. of India v. Tarak Nath Ghosh
T.V. Nataraj v. State of Karnataka
In departmental proceedings, charges must be substantiated by oral evidence; reliance solely on unproven documents violates principles of natural justice.
In disciplinary inquiries, the standard of proof requires more than mere suspicion; due process must be observed, including the right to cross-examine witnesses.
The court ruled that failure to provide inquiry reports and examine witnesses violates natural justice, rendering disciplinary actions arbitrary and illegal.
The absence of a witness list in a disciplinary charge memo violates procedural fairness, rendering the proceedings invalid, necessitating adherence to natural justice principles.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.