Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
ANANDA SEN
Satyendra Kumar Pandey S/o Late Janardan Pandey – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
ANANDA SEN, J.
1. Heard learned counsel representing the petitioner and learned counsel representing the respondent-State.
2. By way of filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the impugned order of punishment as contained in Memo No.599 dated 10.09.2016 (Annexure-5 to the writ petition), whereby the Disciplinary Authority has imposed penalty upon the petitioner. Further, the petitioner has prayed to direct the respondents to pay and release the increments and the difference of salary for the period of suspension.
3. The petitioner was appointed in the year 1991 as a Revenue Karamchari. While posted in Hussainabad Block of Palamu District, he was put under suspension w.e.f. 25.09.2004. After revocation of his suspension, a Memo of Charge was served upon the petitioner being Memo No.523 dated 29.10.2005 and an Enquiry Officer was appointed. The allegations in the charge-sheet against the petitioner are that he had left the Headquarter without prior leave/permission; not performing his duty properly; was not responsible and demanded illegal gratification for effecting mutation, he failed to identify the families wh
Departmental proceedings require strict adherence to the principles of natural justice, including the substantiation of charges with cogent evidence; mere allegations are insufficient.
Disciplinary Authority must provide reasons for differing from the Enquiry Officer's findings in a second show cause notice to ensure compliance with principles of natural justice.
The High Court confirmed that the Disciplinary Authority's decision to impose a penalty is sustainable if procedures are adhered to and the findings are not perverse, maintaining limited judicial rev....
Disciplinary proceedings quashed for defective charge memo without imputations, documents, witnesses; no departmental evidence or witnesses; perfunctory enquiry report lacking independent reasons and....
A departmental inquiry must adhere to procedural standards, requiring the examination of evidence and witnesses to sustain a charge against an employee.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for disciplinary authorities to base their findings on cogent reasons, seek explanation before inflicting major penalty, and pro....
Disciplinary proceedings require oral evidence for proving charges; failure to provide a witness list vitiates the inquiry, emphasizing adherence to natural justice standards.
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
