Back
S. SRIMATHY
G. Vetrivel – Appellant
Versus
Union of India, New Delhi – Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the order passed by the 3rd respondent in his Order No.V-11014/APS/APL-13/GV/LC/2015-11665, dated 30.12.2015, and confirming the order passed by the 4th respondent in his Final Order No.V-15014/CISF/APSZ/Maj-01/CNI/GV/2014-4024, dated 24.06.2014 and quash the same and to direct the respondents to take the petitioner into the strength of Sub-Inspector Executive in the Central Industrial Security Force with all monetary benefits.)
1. This writ petition has been filed to quash the impugned orders, dated 30.12.2015 and 24.06.2014 passed by the 3rd and 4th respondents respectively and direct the respondents to take the petitioner into the strength of Sub-Inspector Executive in the Central Industrial Security Force with all monetary benefits.
2. The brief facts of the writ petition are as follows:
The petitioner has joined duty as Constable in the year 2003 and had served all over India up to the year 2008. Thereafter, he was selected and posted as Sub Inspector, through the Limited Departmental Competitive Examination held in the
Sufficient and effective opportunity should be granted to the delinquent in the domestic enquiry, especially when there is contemplation to impose a major punishment.
Termination upheld as lawful due to prolonged unauthorized absence and failure to substantiate claims of illness, despite claims of procedural violations.
Unauthorised absence is an act of indiscipline and may lead to disciplinary action, including dismissal from service.
The court upheld the disciplinary action based on the established facts and circumstances, emphasizing the importance of considering the intention behind the employee's actions in disciplinary procee....
The Court upheld the penalty of removal from service based on the petitioner's admission of charges, failure to submit written explanations, and the consideration of the petitioner's previous conduct....
The limited scope of interference to a punishment imposed pursuant to a departmental enquiry, barring a few exceptions, and the principle that re-appreciation of evidences is not permissible.
Disciplinary penalties must be proportionate to the misconduct, considering the individual's service history and circumstances surrounding the case.
Limited scope of interference in departmental enquiries unless there is perversity writ large on the face of the proceedings or gross violation of principles of natural justice.
The court emphasized that a medical condition does not excuse an employee's failure to follow leave rules and report to the authorities, and that repeated misconduct can warrant severe punishment.
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
