Back
AJIT KUMAR
Tatsat Mallick – Appellant
Versus
Canara Bank – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Hon'ble Ajit Kumar, J.-Heard Sri Rahul Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Krishna Mohan Asthana, learned counsel for the contesting respondents.
2. Petitioner while working with the respondent bank as an officer in the Middle Management of Grade Scale-I was placed under suspension on 17th January, 2022 setting into motion a departmental disciplinary proceedings for having misbehaved and having conducted a behaviour unbecoming of an officer of the bank of his scale before the higher officer, namely, Assistant General Manager, Circle Office, Agra.
3. Petitioner was served with the charge-sheet on 18th May, 2022 with as many as 8 article of charges to which he did not submit any detailed reply and instead, wrote a mail letter that his previous reply should be taken to be meeting all the points raised in the charge-sheet. The previous reply that has been referred to is of 6th May, 2022, obviously prior to the date of charge-sheet. He participated in the oral inquiry held by the Inquiry Officer pursuant to the notice dated 8th June, 2022 and cross-examined the departmental witnesses, viewed the CCTV footage of the incident of heated exchange of views between
The standard of proof in disciplinary proceedings is based on preponderance of probabilities, and courts will not interfere unless the punishment is shockingly disproportionate to the misconduct.
Punishment in disciplinary proceedings must adhere to principles of natural justice and be proportionate to the misconduct; excessive punishment may warrant judicial intervention.
Disciplinary proceedings were upheld as valid; delay and procedural flaws were insufficient to overturn dismissal for misconduct.
The court held that disciplinary authority's punishment must be proportionate to the misconduct, and failure to adhere to natural justice principles can warrant judicial intervention.
Judicial review of disciplinary actions is limited; courts cannot reappraise evidence or substitute their judgment unless findings are arbitrary or unsupported by evidence.
The power of judicial review, of the Constitutional Courts, is an evaluation of the decision-making process and not the merits of the decision itself. It is to ensure fairness in treatment and not to....
Judicial review of disciplinary actions emphasizes fairness of the inquiry and proportionality of punishment, allowing modification from removal to compulsory retirement when circumstances warrant.
Judicial review in departmental proceedings is limited to ensuring procedural fairness, not evaluating the merits of evidence. The disciplinary authority's conclusions, supported by some evidence, ar....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the limited scope of interference in disciplinary proceedings, emphasizing the need for evidence-based findings and the principles of proportionali....
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
