Back
J. J. MUNIR
Vinod – Appellant
Versus
State Of Uttar Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. In this case, notice was issued on 07.01.2020, granting time to the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent nos. 1 and 2 and to Mr. S.K. Gupta, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent nos. 3 to 8 to file counter affidavits. No counter affidavit has been filed either on behalf of the State or on behalf of respondent nos. 3 to 8. This Court vide order dated 07.01.2020 has condoned the latches in filing the petition.
2. Admit.
3. Heard forthwith.
4. Heard Mr. Rajesh Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Girijesh Kumar Tripathi, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent nos. 1 and 2.
5. No one appears on behalf of respondent nos. 3 to 8.
6. This writ petition is directed against an order dated 15.10.2005 passed by the Nagar Ayukt, Nagar Nigam, Allahabad dismissing the petitioner, a Safai Karmchari from service. This order has been upheld in appeal by the Commissioner, Allahabad Division, Allahabad vide order dated 12.03.2007. Both these orders are impugned in the present writ petition.
7. The petitioner's case is that he was appointed as a Safai Karmchari with the Nagar Nigam, Allahabad by the Nagar Ayukt
Disciplinary proceedings must adhere to principles of natural justice, including proper notice and opportunity for defense, especially when imposing major penalties.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the failure to conduct a proper departmental enquiry, especially in cases involving major penalties, violates the principles of natural justic....
A disciplinary inquiry must follow procedural fairness, including the establishment's burden to prove charges through evidence, especially when major penalties are at stake.
A fair inquiry process is essential in disciplinary proceedings, and failure to adhere to procedural requirements can invalidate dismissal orders.
Disciplinary inquiry under 1999 Rules vitiated without oral hearing opportunity to delinquent, even absent proposed witnesses by either side, as implicit in rules for natural justice compliance.
The inquiry process for major penalties must adhere to principles of natural justice, requiring evidence from the Establishment and proper notice to the accused.
In cases involving the imposition of a major penalty, the establishment must prove charges by examining evidence, particularly witnesses, and adhere to the principles of natural justice in the domest....
In disciplinary proceedings involving major penalties, the burden of proof lies with the establishment to substantiate charges through a fair inquiry process that includes the presentation of evidenc....
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
