Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SANJAY PRASAD
Jharkhand Gramin Bank – Appellant
Versus
Concerned Workman Mr. Awinash Kumar Sinha, S/o Late Lala Aditya Prasad – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SANJAY PRASAD, J.
This writ petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioner-Bank for the following reliefs:-
“(i) For the issuance of an appropriate writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions or a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the Award passed by Sri Kishori Ram, Presiding Officer of the Industrial Tribunal No.2 at Dhanbad in Reference No.12 of 2006 dated 19.01.2012 whereby and wherein the punishment of degradation of 10 lower stage in incremental scale from 15.10.2001 passed by the Chairman and Disciplinary Authority to Respondent No.1 Sri Awinash Kumar Sinha Staff/Clerk-Cashier was held to be unjustified and directed the Management of the Bank to upgrade the aforesaid 10 lower stages in incremental scale with all consequential benefits.
(ii) For the issuance of a further appropriate writ, order or direction to quash the notification of Award by Govt. of India/Bharat Sarkar, Ministry of Labour/Shram Mantralaya, New Delhi dated 09.02.2012 whereby and wherein the Award of Reference No.12 of 2006 of the Central Govt. Industrial Tribunal Cum Labour Court No.2, Dhanbad in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Giridih Kshetriya Gramin Bank and t
Judicial review of disciplinary action is warranted where punishment is shockingly disproportionate to the charges, emphasizing the requirement of adhering to natural justice and proportionality in s....
A tribunal's interference in disciplinary matters requires solid grounds and should not reassess evidence once the fairness of the domestic enquiry is acknowledged by the employee.
The Tribunal's modification of punishment from dismissal to compulsory retirement was justified based on proportionality and the workman's long service, emphasizing the importance of fair inquiry pro....
The court held that disciplinary authority's punishment must be proportionate to the misconduct, and failure to adhere to natural justice principles can warrant judicial intervention.
Judicial review in disciplinary matters is limited to assessing procedural fairness, and courts will not re-evaluate evidence unless findings are arbitrary or unsupported.
Judicial review of disciplinary actions emphasizes fairness of the inquiry and proportionality of punishment, allowing modification from removal to compulsory retirement when circumstances warrant.
Punishment in disciplinary proceedings must adhere to principles of natural justice and be proportionate to the misconduct; excessive punishment may warrant judicial intervention.
The Industrial Tribunal can modify punitive measures if it determines that an employee was treated discriminatorily compared to similarly situated employees, according to Section 11A of the Industria....
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
