Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.
Ashok Kumar Seth – Appellant
Versus
U.P. Cooperative Federation Ltd Thru M.D. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Brij Raj Singh, J.
1. This writ petition has been filed seeking following reliefs:-
“I) To issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Certiorari or likewise quashing the impugned order of punishment dated 10.01.2005 passed by the respondent no.2 contained in Annexure No.8.
II) To issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus or likewise commanding the respondent nos.1 and 2 to reinstate the petitioner in service with consequential benefits.”
2. The facts giving rise to the present writ petition are that petitioner was appointed on the post of Assistant in the year 1976 in the U.P. Cooperative Federation Limited (for short “Federation”) and after completion of probation period satisfactorily, he was confirmed on the said post in 1978. After completion of twelve years of continuous and satisfactory service, the petitioner was promoted to the post of Assistant Godown Keeper in 1988. Services of the petitioner and employees of Cooperative Societies are governed by the Regulations known as “U.P. Cooperative Societies Employees Service Regulations, 1975” (for short “Regulations, 1975”) and these guidelines were framed by the Uttar Pradesh Cooperative Institutional
Disciplinary proceedings must adhere to principles of natural justice, including the right to a fair hearing and examination of evidence, as mandated by applicable regulations.
Rule 7(vii) provides that where charged government servant denies charges, enquiry officer shall proceed to call witnesses proposed in charge sheet.
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....
The court ruled that failure to provide inquiry reports and examine witnesses violates natural justice, rendering disciplinary actions arbitrary and illegal.
(1) Dismissal – [Departmental charge-sheet is not a plaint that an evasive reply thereto may amount to admission – In a departmental enquiry, unless charge is admitted, burden to prove charge lies on....
The court emphasized that a departmental inquiry must adhere to statutory procedures and principles of natural justice; failure to do so invalidates the resulting punishment.
Departmental inquiries must adhere to prescribed procedures, and disproportionate punishment violates principles of natural justice.
The dismissal of an employee is invalid if the enquiry does not adhere to procedural fairness, specifically failing to fix a date, time, and place for oral enquiry.
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
