Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M.DHANDAPANI, J
S.Immanuel – Appellant
Versus
Central Government Industrial Tribunal Cum Labour Court Rep. By its Presiding Officer – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. allegations against petitioner (Para 2) |
| 2. disciplinary proceedings (Para 3) |
| 3. tribunal's adjudication (Para 4) |
| 4. petitioner's claims (Para 5) |
| 5. nature of evidence (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 6. judicial review principles (Para 17) |
| 7. judicial review scope (Para 18 , 19) |
| 8. disciplinary authority's role (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36) |
| 9. writ petition outcome (Para 37) |
ORDER :
M.Dhandapani, J.
Aggrieved by the impugned order passed by the Tribunal in denying the relief of reinstatement to the workman, viz., the petitioner herein, the present writ petition has been filed challenging the said order dated 19.11.2010 passed in ID No.38/2007.
2. The sum and substance of the gravamen of the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner acted prejudicial to the interest of the bank and its customers by attempting to damage the property, by being a member of the Minority Trade Union and also indulged in misappropriation of money of the customers by falsifying their pass books and fabricating the challan and remitted the said sums at a later date, as if the said sums were remitted only
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 proceedings is limited to assessing procedural fairness; evidence must meet the preponderance of probabilities standard in administrative contexts, not beyond a reason....
Judicial review of disciplinary actions emphasizes fairness of the inquiry and proportionality of punishment, allowing modification from removal to compulsory retirement when circumstances warrant.
Judicial review of disciplinary actions is limited; courts cannot reappraise evidence or substitute their judgment unless findings are arbitrary or unsupported by evidence.
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....
The court emphasized the necessity of adhering to principles of natural justice in disciplinary inquiries, asserting that findings must be supported by adequate evidence and fair procedures.
The court upheld the dismissal of the petitioner, emphasizing adherence to natural justice and the limited scope of judicial review in disciplinary proceedings.
The Tribunal's modification of punishment from dismissal to compulsory retirement was justified based on proportionality and the workman's long service, emphasizing the importance of fair inquiry pro....
The main legal point established is the scope of judicial review in departmental enquiry proceedings, emphasizing the principles of natural justice, the authority of the disciplinary officers, and th....
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
