Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
JAGMOHAN BANSAL
Husan Lal – Appellant
Versus
Punjab University, Chandigarh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J.
1. The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking setting aside of orders passed by authorities whereby he has been awarded punishment of forfeiture of three increments with cumulative effect.
2. The petitioner joined Panjab University as Clerk in 1990 on regular basis. He was transferred to Chemical Engineering department and promoted as Jr. Assistant in 1995 in Certificate Section. He was further transferred to the Examination Branch. He worked for eight years in the Examination Branch and dealt with examination of different classes. In 2009, two students of 6th Semester of Department of Law applied for change of centre from Chandigarh to Muktsar. Due to rush of work, petitioner could not verify documents of the aforesaid students. President, Panjab University Campus Student Council sent a complaint to Vice Chancellor alleging that Simranjit Singh Dhillon was allotted Chandigarh-II as examination centre for April’ 2009 but he appeared at Muktsar Centre. On enquiry, it was found that Navjot Saini-student of 6th Semester of Department of Law had also appeared at Muktsar without permission. The Vice
Stoppage of one annual increment with cumulative/permanent effect is a major penalty under service rules, equating to reduction to lower pay stage, requiring full departmental inquiry; may be modifie....
Stoppage of increments with cumulative effect is a major penalty requiring a departmental enquiry under the Chhattisgarh Civil Services Rules, 1966.
The stoppage of increments with cumulative effect is deemed a major penalty requiring a formal inquiry as per relevant regulations and previous court rulings.
Stoppage of increment with cumulative effect is a major penalty requiring a regular departmental inquiry; failure to conduct such inquiry renders the order illegal.
The imposition of major penalties, such as withholding increments with cumulative effect, requires a proper enquiry as per established legal principles.
The court ruled that a major penalty procedure cannot be converted into a minor penalty procedure without explicit regulatory provisions, but found no prejudice in the minor penalty imposed.
The imposition of a penalty not prescribed under statutory rules is invalid, and cumulative penalties are not permissible under the Central Reserve Police Force Rules.
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
