Back
SUNEET KUMAR
Kamal Kumar Saxena – Appellant
Versus
State Of U. P. Thru Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Medical And Health – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Sri Rajat Rajan Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Virendra Singh, learned counsel for the State-respondent.
2. Petitioner, a medical officer, working with the State-respondents was served upon a charge sheet dated 19.09.2012, levelling imputation of misconduct on two charges alleging to have caused pecuniary loss to the State. Prior to issue of the charge sheet, petitioner was placed under suspension on 11.06.2012. The disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner is mandated under the Uttar Pradesh Government Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1999 (for short 'Rules 1999'). The petitioner responded by filing reply on 24.08.2015, denying the charges and further demanded documents which were not supplied to him.
3. It appears that the documents were in the custody of Central Bureau of Investigation (C.B.I.). The relevant documents were supplied to the petitioner on 02.09.2015, calling upon the petitioner to submit his reply. Petitioner submitted his reply on 16.09.2015 and further submitted a list of witnesses he proposed to examine, which included 100-150 witnesses as noted in the enquiry report. The enquiry officer declined to examine the off
Point of Law - It is a settled legal proposition that, once the Court set asides an order of punishment on the ground, that the enquiry was not properly conducted, the Court should not severely precl....
A valid departmental inquiry requires adherence to procedural safeguards, including the establishment proving charges through evidence, or it is deemed invalid.
Rule 7(vii) provides that where charged government servant denies charges, enquiry officer shall proceed to call witnesses proposed in charge sheet.
Prolonged disciplinary proceedings against retired employees without justification can lead to quashing of the proceedings, emphasizing the need for timely action.
Disciplinary proceedings must adhere to procedural fairness, but the absence of witness examination does not automatically void an inquiry if the charged party fails to propose witnesses.
The court established that an oral inquiry is essential in disciplinary proceedings, and its absence violates natural justice, invalidating any resultant punishment.
: : (1) When a public servant reaches age of superannuation and waits to have exit from his service, initiation of disciplinary proceedings concerning old events generally would be unreasonable and u....
: In absence of rules and regulations providing to the contrary, disciplinary proceedings against a retired Government Official cannot be instituted or continued.
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
