Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
V.NARASINGH
Baladev Panda – Appellant
Versus
Chief General Manager, State Bank Of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
V. NARASINGH, J.
Heard Mr. S.S Das, learned senior counsel instructed by Mr. Modi, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. D.K Mishra, learned counsel for the Opposite Parties.
1. The Petitioner who was working as Junior Management Grade, Scale-I (JMGS-I), State Bank of India, Buxibazar Branch, Cuttack assails the orders passed by the Appointing Authority as well as the Appellate Authority at Annexures-8 & 9 respectively imposing the punishment of Removal from service which is one of the major penalties in terms of the Rule 67(g) of STATE BANK OF INDIA OFFICERS SERVICE RULES (SBIOSR), 1992.
It is apt to note here that, earlier assailing the order of “dismissal”, which was affirmed by Hon’ble Single Judge of this Court in W.P(C) No.18797 of 2019, the Petitioner preferred Writ Appeal No.372 of 2017 and in terms of the order dated 07.01.2019 in the said Writ Appeal, the impugned orders at Annexures-8 and 9 altering the punishment of “Dismissal” to removal” has been passed which is challenged in the present Writ Petition.
2. Brief facts germane for just adjudication are indicated hereunder;
The Petitioner was working as Officer Junior Management Grade Scale-1 and during his i
The court emphasized proportionality in disciplinary actions, asserting penalties must align with the seriousness of misconduct and take into account mitigating circumstances and lack of financial lo....
Judicial review of disciplinary actions emphasizes fairness of the inquiry and proportionality of punishment, allowing modification from removal to compulsory retirement when circumstances warrant.
In disciplinary proceedings, judicial review permits interference with disproportionate punishment quantum if shockingly harsh relative to misconduct, prior impeccable record, and parity, even withou....
Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution of India, High Court shall not reappreciate evidence and interfere with conclusions of inquiry and cannot go into adequacy of evidence or reliability of evidence ....
The disciplinary authority must independently assess penalties without undue influence from external advice, ensuring adherence to principles of natural justice.
The court ruled on the necessity of proportionality in disciplinary action, emphasizing that harsh penalties must be justified and aligned with the seriousness of the misconduct.
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
