Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.
Amod Kumar Sachan Presently Professor Head of Deptt. Deptt. of Pharmacology Kgmu Lko. – Appellant
Versus
State Of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy./ Prin. Secy. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Rajesh Singh Chauhan, J.
1. Heard Shri Gaurav Mehrotra, learned counsel assisted by Ms. Ritika Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Pradeep Kumar Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State- opposite party No.1 and Shri Asit Chaturvedi, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Shubham Tripathi, learned counsel for the opposite party Nos.2, 3, 4, 5 & 6.
2. Shri Shubham Tripathi has filed short counter affidavit and Ms. Ritika Singh has filed supplementary affidavit, which are taken on the record.
3. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:-
“(I) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned decision dated 30.03.2025 and 03.05.2025 of the Respondent No.5, copy whereof is contained as Annexure Nos.2 and 3 to this writ petition.
(II) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to grant permission to the petitioner for providing legal assistance in the pending disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner.
(III) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to provide the photocopie
The denial of legal assistance and access to documents in disciplinary proceedings violates natural justice, especially when the accused faces a legally trained opponent.
The refusal to allow legal representation in a disciplinary enquiry, particularly when the presenting officer is legally trained, violates natural justice and renders the proceedings invalid.
The refusal to sanction the service of a lawyer in the inquiry was not a proper exercise of the discretion under the rule resulting in a failure of natural justice.
Legal representation in disciplinary proceedings is contingent upon the Presenting Officer being a legal practitioner, as per Rule 9(5) of the Assam Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1964.
No pay cannot be applied to the present facts of the case, since the petitioner did not attend to work on account of illegal order of suspension and dismissal from service, passed by the appellants h....
Procedural irregularities in disciplinary proceedings do not automatically invalidate the inquiry unless they result in prejudice to the employee's ability to defend themselves.
It is a duty of Inquiry Officer to scan entire evidence in order to arrive at a finding after judging case of all the parties, adhering to the principles of natural justice, otherwise, inquiry is vit....
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
