Back
SUNEET KUMAR, RAJENDRA KUMAR IV
Satya Narain Dubey – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner – applicant and learned counsel for the Union of India/Railway Department.
2. The present writ petition is directed against the judgment and order dated 28.03.2022, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad (for short, “Tribunal”), in Original Application No.330/1393 of 2011, (Satya Narayan Dubey versus Union of India and others).
3. The services of the petitioner came to be terminated pursuant to Rule 14(1) of the Railway Servants (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1968, (for short “Rules, 1968”), on being convicted by the learned trial Court under Sections 409 & 477-A IPC and 13(2) & 13(1) of the Prevention of Corruption Act to undergo 7 years, 2 years and 5 years of rigorous imprisonment besides imposition of fine.
4. Petitioner has since been bailed out by the Appellate Court. The learned Tribunal was of the view that none of the orders passed either by the disciplinary authority, appellate authority or the revisional authority qualify as reasoned and speaking order, but having regard to the fact that the petitioner being convicted by the trial Court and the penalty imposed thereof upon him is sustaina
Speaking order or reasoned order is considered the third pillar of natural justice. Speaking orders are essential for judicial review. Circumstances of the case is a piece of evidence that indicates ....
Removal from service post-criminal conviction not automatic under Rule 19(i) CCS(CCA) Rules; requires disciplinary authority's active consideration of all circumstances, effective representation oppo....
Conviction persists despite sentence stay; employer may dismiss railway servant without inquiry under Art. 311(2)(a).
Departure from regular disciplinary enquiry under Rule 14(ii) requires reasoned satisfaction of impracticability; mere staff anger insufficient, mandating compliance with natural justice and Article ....
In cases of corruption convictions, the dismissal of a government servant under Rule 19(1) of the CCA Rules, 1966 may not require prior notice, and the decision may be based on the seriousness of the....
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
