Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
M.S. RAMACHANDRA RAO, C.J., DEEPAK ROSHAN
Nagendra Kumar, son of Sri Siddeshwar Prasad Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(M.S. Ramachandra Rao, C.J.)
1) The petitioner was initially appointed as a stenographer in the judgeship of West Singhbhum and later promoted to Grade-I post on 17.8.2011 and was working as Office Assistant. He was allocated the cases relating to work at police stations and another police station called Tebo Police Station was allocated to one Anit Chandra Kumar on 8.8.2022.
2) A complaint was filed on 18.9.2023 by one Sanjeev Kumar, S.I. of Police Station,Tebo, West Singhbhum, alleging that the petitioner and the said Anit Chandra Kumar, who were working as office clerks of the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Porahat had demanded money from him in lieu of the work done by them on 5.9.2023.
3) The charge memo was issued by the 3rd respondent alleging that petitioner had demanded money from police officials for each and every official work done by him and he also misbehaved with the persons who did not give him money. Details were mentioned in the charge memo. It was also alleged that he was guilty of willful insubordination and was habitually negligent while working as office clerk.
4) Inquiry Officer was appointed by the 3rd respondent against both the petitioner and Sr
Disciplinary action against government servants must follow due process; findings of misconduct supported by evidence warrant enforcement of penalties such as compulsory retirement.
Disciplinary dismissal can be upheld based on preponderance of evidence, including audio recordings, even when there's a later compromise concerning alleged misconduct.
Inquiring Authority shall return a finding of guilt in respect of those articles of charge to which Government servant pleads guilty.
Sufficient evidence is required to uphold charges of corruption, and mere handling of money does not equate to knowledge of illicit activities.
Disciplinary authorities must follow procedural rules, but admissions by the accused can impact the outcome of proceedings, justifying the penalties imposed.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for a formal inquiry in matters involving the imposition of a major penalty, with the burden of proof on the Establishment to produ....
Disciplinary actions require clear evidence beyond mere admissions; unsupported admissions cannot justify punitive measures.
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
