Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
SANDEEP MOUDGIL
Tarun Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State Of Haryana – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J.
CM-996-CWP-2026
1. This is an application for placing on record the judgment dated 24.12.2025 (Annexure P-7).
2. For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed and Annexure P-7 is taken on record subject to all just exceptions.
CWP-22733-2026
Prayer
3. The jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the order dated 19.07.2025/01.08.2025 (Annexure P-4) whereby the petitioner’s services were dispensed with by the respondents and a direction to grant the petitioner all consequential benefits.
Brief Facts
4. The petitioner was appointed as Drugs Control Officer on the recommendation of the Haryana Public Service Commission pursuant to the judgment of the Supreme Court in State of Haryana vs. Krishan Kumar, vide appointment letter dated 10.08.2023, and joined service on 25.08.2023. He was posted at Charkhi Dadri on 12.12.2023.
5. On 15.05.2025, an FIR No. 16 was registered against the petitioner under Sections 7 & 7A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and Sections 61(2) & 308(2) BNS. The petitioner was arrested and subsequently granted
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for adherence to the principles of natural justice in employment disengagement, emphasizing the need for a detailed enquiry and opp....
Termination of a probationer based on misconduct requires a formal enquiry; failure to do so renders the termination stigmatic and punitive.
Discharge of a probationary judicial officer based on misconduct allegations without a proper inquiry violates constitutional protections, constituting punitive action and inflicting stigma.
If misconduct is the foundation to pass the order, then an enquiry into misconduct should be conducted and an action according to law should follow. But if it is (sic) notice, it is not incumbent upo....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the distinction between termination simpliciter and punitive termination based on the nature of the inquiry and the purpose of the termination.
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
