Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
Pitambar Nayak – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. prayer for quashing the disciplinary proceeding. (Para 2) |
| 2. petitioner’s request regarding documents and delays. (Para 3) |
| 3. court's views on delays and petitioner’s rights. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 4. writ petition disposed of favorably. (Para 7) |
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Ms. S. Jena, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S.P. Das, learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State.
“In the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner respectfully prays that the Hon'ble Court may be graciously pleased to graciously pleased to admit this writ petition, issue notice to the 0pp. Parties specifically the O.P no.2 to show cause as to why the disciplinary proceeding initiated on 31.10.2002 shall not be quashed and if the 0pp. Parties fail to show cause or show insufficient cause, the Hon'ble Court upon hearing the parties may be further pleased to allow this writ petition by issuing a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate in quashing the disciplinary proceeding initiated on 31.10.2002 and thereby directing the O.P no.l & 2 to give promotion to the petitioner to the post of Asst. Executive Engineer and may be further pleased to pass such other order/orders, direct
Long delays in disciplinary proceedings can lead to their quashing, especially when the charged employee is not at fault, violating principles of administrative justice.
Delay in disciplinary proceedings without justification violates principles of administrative justice, warranting quashing of proceedings.
Inordinate delay in disciplinary proceedings can lead to quashing if it causes prejudice to the employee, emphasizing the necessity for timely resolution.
Disciplinary proceedings initiated against the delinquent employee is required to be concluded expeditiously and he should not be made to undergo mental agony and monetary loss
Point of law: suspension was prolonged for more than 11 years in some of the judgments referred above. But, still, the Courts held that, it depends upon the circumstances of each case and varies from....
The main legal principle established is that inordinate delay in concluding disciplinary proceedings, causing prejudice and emotional distress to the accused, may warrant the closure of the proceedin....
Point of law: The protracted disciplinary enquiry against a Government employee issued, therefore, be avoided not only in the interests of Government employee, but in the public interest and also in ....
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
