IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, ARUN KUMAR RAI
Union of India through General Manager, East Central Railway, Hajipur – Appellant
Versus
Nitish Ranjan S/o Shri Birendra Prasad Gupta – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. writ challenges tribunal's quashing of removal orders (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. charge of negligent forklift operation causing death (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. summary removal invoked under rule 14(ii) d&a rules (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. tribunal sets aside orders for procedural violations (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 5. petitioner defends rule 14 application and maintainability (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 6. judicial review limited to apparent error or perversity (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 7. rule 14 requires recorded reasons for enquiry impracticability (Para 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35) |
| 8. removal order lacks cogent satisfaction reasons (Para 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44) |
| 9. natural justice violation overrides alternative remedies (Para 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52) |
| 10. writ petition dismissed, no interference (Para 53 , 54) |
JUDGMENT :
1. The instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 08.04.2025 passed in O.A. No.051/00281/2021 by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Circuit Bench, Ranchi whereby and whereunder, the learned Tribunal has allowed the said original appli
L. Chandra Kumar vs. Union of India and Ors.
West Bengal Central School Service Commission vs. Abdul Halim
T.C. Basappa vs. T. Nagappa and Anr.
Punjab National Bank & Ors. v. Kunj Behari Misra
Raj Kishore Jha v. State of Bihar
Kranti Associates (P) Ltd. v. Masood Ahmed Khan
Maneka Gandhi Vs. Union of India and Anr.
Whirlpool Corporation Vs. Registrar of Trade Marks, Mumbai & Ors.
Departure from regular disciplinary enquiry under Rule 14(ii) requires reasoned satisfaction of impracticability; mere staff anger insufficient, mandating compliance with natural justice and Article ....
Departure from regular disciplinary inquiry under Rule 14(ii) RS(D&A) Rules requires specific recorded reasons for impracticability; vague satisfaction invalidates removal order, especially with crim....
Judicial review in disciplinary matters is limited to process legality; evidence evaluation remains within the disciplinary authority's purview.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the obligation of the authorities to adhere to the principles of natural justice and provide a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the employe....
Fairness in disciplinary proceedings requires adherence to natural justice, and actions unsupported by adequate evidence are not sustainable.
The principles of natural justice require that a delinquent employee be given a copy of the preliminary enquiry report before the disciplinary authority arrives at its conclusions with regard to the ....
Procedural violations in disciplinary hearings, such as lack of impartiality and proper inquiry conduct, invalidate removal from service and necessitate quashing of disciplinary orders.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.