Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, ARUN KUMAR RAI
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited – Appellant
Versus
Abhay Shnkar Jha, Son of Late Sita Ram Jha – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. employees' regularization history and repeated departmental challenges. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. fraud inquiry permitted under tribunal-granted liberty. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. identical issues dismissed in prior writ petitions. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 4. no administrative review after judicial quashing of charges. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 5. writ dismissed following binding prior judgment. (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
JUDGMENT :
Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.
1. In the instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed for the following reliefs:
“For issuance of a writ of or in the nature of certiorari for quashing of order/judgment dated 09.04.2025 passed in O.A No. OA/51/00444/2020 by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna (Circuit Bench at Ranchi) whereby and whereunder Original Application filed by the respondents has been allowed and the learned Tribunal has been pleased to quash and set aside order dated 13.11.2020 calling the applicants to appear in the Departmental Enquiry in respect of Charge Sheet dated 29.11.2016 and further direction was given to grant all consequential benefits to the applicants as per the rules within a periods of th
No administrative power to review or revive departmental enquiry after judicial quashing of charge memorandum attaining finality; limited to statutory provisions only.
Administrative authority cannot review judicially quashed charge memorandum attaining finality by issuing fresh inquiry notices absent statutory power; violates judicial discipline.
Fairness in disciplinary proceedings requires adherence to natural justice, and actions unsupported by adequate evidence are not sustainable.
The court established that the standard of proof in departmental proceedings is 'preponderance of probability', allowing for disciplinary action even if a related criminal charge is not proven beyond....
The court emphasized the necessity of providing all relevant documents to a charged employee to ensure a fair opportunity for defense in disciplinary proceedings.
Judicial review of disciplinary actions is limited; courts cannot reappraise evidence or substitute their judgment unless findings are arbitrary or unsupported by evidence.
Charge memo in disciplinary proceedings must be approved by the disciplinary authority; lack thereof renders entire proceedings vitiated ab initio, warranting quashing without remand in peculiar circ....
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
