Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Honourable Mr Justice M.DHANDAPANI
B. Ramesh – Appellant
Versus
Presiding Officer Central Government Industrial Tribunal-Cum-Labour Court, Chennai – Respondent
ORDER :
1. Assailing the order dated 5.5.2014, in and by which the punishment of dismissal from service imposed on the petitioner was confirmed by the Labour Court in I.D. No.86/2011, the present writ petition has been filed.
2. The petitioner joined the services of the Bank as Clerk in the year 1996 and was posted initially at Tondiarpet Branch from where he was thereafter transferred to Venkatnarayana Road Branch, Chennai during July, 2002. The petitioner was placed under suspension on 5.9.2003 on charges of misconduct on the allegation that the petitioner, while working at Venkatnarayana Road Branch, had fraudulently withdrawn amounts aggregating to Rs.52,800/- by misusing the single window operating system by unauthorizedly debiting closed loan against term deposit accounts, viz., A/s Nos.62 and 152. The officer, who was granted responsibility to investigate the matter filed report holding that the fraudulent transactions of changing the name of the closed loan against term deposit by changing the limit, drawing power, etc., was done by one Udaya Kumar, a clerk, who had misappropriated about Rs.50 Lakhs on different dates.
3. The petitioner was issued with show cause notice and no
Judicial review of disciplinary proceedings is limited to assessing procedural fairness; evidence must meet the preponderance of probabilities standard in administrative contexts, not beyond a reason....
The standard of proof in disciplinary proceedings is based on preponderance of probabilities, and the court does not reappraise evidence unless there is a violation of natural justice.
Judicial review in departmental proceedings is limited to ensuring procedural fairness, not evaluating the merits of evidence. The disciplinary authority's conclusions, supported by some evidence, ar....
Judicial review of disciplinary actions emphasizes fairness of the inquiry and proportionality of punishment, allowing modification from removal to compulsory retirement when circumstances warrant.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the limited scope of interference in disciplinary proceedings, emphasizing the need for evidence-based findings and the principles of proportionali....
Judicial review of disciplinary proceedings is limited to ensuring compliance with natural justice and legality, not re-evaluating evidence or substituting the disciplinary authority's findings.
Judicial review in disciplinary matters is limited to assessing procedural fairness, and courts will not re-evaluate evidence unless findings are arbitrary or unsupported.
Judicial review of disciplinary actions is limited; courts cannot reappraise evidence or substitute their judgment unless findings are arbitrary or unsupported by evidence.
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
