Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
M.S. Ramachandra Rao, CJ., DEEPAK ROSHAN
Shankar Kumar Singh, son of Late Gajendra Prasad Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand, through the Principal Secretary, Department of Personnel, Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasha Department, Government of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(M.S. Ramachandra Rao, C.J.)
1) In this writ petition the petitioner has assailed the order dt. 8.8.2023 passed by the 3rd respondent imposing punishment of dismissal on the petitioner and also the decision taken on 3.12.2024 by the Standing Appeal Committee which was communicated to the petitioner on 20.12.2024, dismissing his appeal.
2) The petitioner was working in a Class-III post from 7.12.2005 in the Civil Court, Dhanbad in the Copying Department.
3) A complaint was lodged by one Goutam Kumar Tewary against the petitioner on 15.3.2022 before the Registrar of the Civil Court, Dhanbad alleging therein that the petitioner has realized Rs. 4.50 Lakhs for providing employment as Fourth Grade employee at Civil Court, Dhanbad and that the said amount was given to the petitioner between 25.12.2014 to 7.1.2015. The complainant backed this allegation by an affidavit dt. 11.5.2022 stating therein that petitioner demanded Rs. 8.00 Lakhs from him for providing employment in all.
4) Based on the complaint, Enquiry Case No. 1 of 2022 was registered by the Registrar, Civil Court Dhanbad and the statement of the complainant was recorded on 9.6.2022.
5) The Registrar of the Civil Court, D
Disciplinary dismissal can be upheld based on preponderance of evidence, including audio recordings, even when there's a later compromise concerning alleged misconduct.
Disciplinary authorities must follow the established procedure of law and judicial pronouncements in disciplinary proceedings.
Non-examination of a complainant in a disciplinary inquiry is not fatal if sufficient evidence supports the charges, and harsh penalties can be justified based on loss of confidence.
The punishment imposed must be proportionate and not unduly harsh, and the failure to examine vital witnesses can vitiate the departmental proceeding.
Disciplinary action against government servants must follow due process; findings of misconduct supported by evidence warrant enforcement of penalties such as compulsory retirement.
Disciplinary proceedings quashed for defective charge memo without imputations, documents, witnesses; no departmental evidence or witnesses; perfunctory enquiry report lacking independent reasons and....
Disciplinary findings are unsustainable without cogent evidence, reflecting violations of natural justice principles, requiring independent evaluation by authorities.
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
