Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G.ARUL MURUGAN, R.SUBRAMANIAN
Principal Secretary to Government, Revenue Department – Appellant
Versus
S.Manoharan – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
G.ARUL MURUGAN, J.
This intra-court appeal is directed against the order dated 03.06.2024 in W.P.No.6839 of 2017, wherein the punishment of compulsory retirement imposed on the writ petitioner was set aside and the appellants were directed to settle the consequential benefits.
2. The respondent herein while he was working as Tahsildar in Tambaram Taluk, was visited with the charge memo dated 02.03.2010 under Rule 17(b) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1955 [hereafter referred to as “the Rules”] by framing three charges. The charges came to be issued mainly on the ground that the respondent had passed an order on 11.09.2002 for effecting change of register, based on the petition of one Thiru.K.Krishnan dated 16.08.2002 in respect of the Government lands measuring an extent of 10 acres in Survey No.657/1A2 of Pallikaranai Village, Tambaram Taluk, which is classified as Sarkar Poramboku-Kazhuveli.
3. The respondent submitted his reply on 30.06.2010 and not satisfied with the reply an enquiry officer was appointed. In the enquiry only one document that is the order dated 11.09.2002, was filed and no witnesses were examined. After completing the enqui
A disciplinary authority must follow procedural rules that require evidence to substantiate charges; failure to do so renders proceedings invalid and punishments imposed unsustainable.
Disciplinary authorities must provide reasons for disagreeing with enquiry officer findings and issue a second show cause notice before imposing punishment, adhering to principles of natural justice.
The charges framed against an individual should be proportionate to the delinquencies committed, and the enquiry should be conducted in a fair and proper manner, adhering to the principles of natural....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for disciplinary authorities to follow the necessary procedure and principles of natural justice, as mandated by the disciplinary r....
Disciplinary proceedings require oral evidence for proving charges; failure to provide a witness list vitiates the inquiry, emphasizing adherence to natural justice standards.
The main legal point established is the requirement for timely framing of charges, non-discriminatory action against co-delinquents, and the need for a joint enquiry for co-delinquents from different....
Disciplinary proceedings must adhere to principles of natural justice, including the right to a fair hearing and the requirement for oral evidence. Failure to comply renders the proceedings and resul....
Disciplinary inquiry under 1999 Rules vitiated without oral hearing opportunity to delinquent, even absent proposed witnesses by either side, as implicit in rules for natural justice compliance.
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
