Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
M.S.SONAK, C.J., DEEPAK ROSHAN
State of Jharkhand, through the Secretary, Personnel Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasa Department – Appellant
Versus
Anwar Hussain, Son of Md. Quayum – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Deepak Roshan, J.
I.A. No. 3269 of 2023
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. This interlocutory application seeks condonation of delay of 356 days in instituting the appeal.
3. We have perused the averments set out in interlocutory application and we are satisfied that the cause shown is sufficient.
4. Accordingly, we condone the delay and disposed of I.A. No. 3269 of 2023.
L.P.A. No. 159 of 2023
5. With the consent of the parties, the matter was heard on merit.
6. This intra-court appeal is directed against the order dated 12-12-2022, passed by the learned writ court in W.P.(S) No. 7251 of 2017; whereby the writ petition was allowed and the order of dismissal issued against the petitioner has been quashed and set aside and the appellant-respondents were directed to extend all consequential benefit to the writ petitioner-respondent.
7. Briefly stated, the respondent-writ petitioner was Circle Officer and was posted on various places. After cadre division of the State of Bihar, the respondent- writ petitioner was allocated Jharkhand cadre.
8. While he was posted at Panki and was performing additional charge of Lesliganj for the period 2003, a charge memo was issued on 21/10/
Disciplinary proceedings vitiated without oral evidence proving documents, even ex-parte; inquiry officer must independently assess evidence sufficiency as quasi-judicial authority, upholding natural....
Departmental proceedings vitiated if based solely on unproved criminal investigation documents without oral witnesses or cross-examination, violating natural justice and fair play principles.
Disciplinary inquiry under 1999 Rules vitiated without oral hearing opportunity to delinquent, even absent proposed witnesses by either side, as implicit in rules for natural justice compliance.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of evidence to prove charges in a disciplinary proceeding, the need for adherence to natural justice principles, and the entitle....
Disciplinary proceedings require oral evidence for proving charges; failure to provide a witness list vitiates the inquiry, emphasizing adherence to natural justice standards.
Penalty – Recording of evidence in a disciplinary proceeding proposing charges of a major punishment is mandatory – Even in an ex-parte inquiry, it is sine qua non to record evidence of witnesses for....
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
