Back
D. BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY
G. Prem Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Chennai Metropolitan Water Supply & Sewerage Board, Represented by its Managing Director, Chintadripet, Chennai – Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records relating to the proceedings of the first respondent in No.CMWSSB/P&A/VC(A)/7740/2008, dated 12.07.2008, confirming the order of the second respondent made in Proc.No.MMWSSB/P&A/STF/RA2/50207/92, dated 12.01.1996 imposing the punishment of stoppage of two increments with cumulative effect and treating the period of suspension as one on leave and quash the same.)
This Writ Petition is filed challenging the order passed by the second respondent, dated 12.01.1996 imposing the punishment of stoppage of two increments with cumulative effect and the order dated 12.07.2008 passed by the first respondent, confirming the same on appeal.
2. Brief facts leading to the disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner is that, aggrieved by non-consideration of several demands, the Association of Assistant Engineers indulged in certain forms of protest, which led to a surcharge atmosphere, which led to issuance of charge memo to the petitioner, who was also the office bearer of the Association at the relevant point of time. The petitioner was suspe
The court emphasized the need for findings in disciplinary proceedings to be based on legally acceptable evidence and held that the admission of fact does not necessarily amount to admission of charg....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for equal treatment of delinquents in disciplinary proceedings and the adverse impact of delay in concluding disciplinary actions, ....
The court emphasized that the disciplinary proceedings were conducted in accordance with the procedures under the Discipline and Appeal Rules, and the scope of judicial review was limited in this cas....
The disciplinary authority must record its own findings and provide an opportunity for the delinquent employee to respond if it disagrees with the findings of the inquiry officer. The delay in initia....
Authorities must provide reasoned decisions, avoid pre-judging issues, and adhere to principles of natural justice in disciplinary proceedings.
Whenever disciplinary authority disagrees with inquiry authority then before it records its own findings on such charge, it must record its tentative reasons for such disagreement.
In disciplinary proceedings, the authority imposing penalties must adhere to procedural fairness, including providing reasons for differing from an inquiry officer's findings and allowing the employe....
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
