Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Vivek Kumar Birla, Yogendra Kumar Srivastava
State of U.P. – Appellant
Versus
Prem Chandra Verma – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. introduction of the case and parties involved. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. context of the writ petition and prior proceedings. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. affidavit submission and issues regarding increment. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. state's arguments regarding disciplinary proceedings. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 5. request for supporting legal foundation regarding procedures. (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 6. judicial review and authority discretion in discipline proceedings. (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 7. conclusion regarding judiciary's limits in disciplinary actions. (Para 29 , 33) |
| 8. final orders and decisions of the court. (Para 35) |
JUDGMENT :
Yogendra Kumar Srivastava, J.
1. Heard Sri Ratan Deep Mishra, learned Standing Counsel for the State-appellants and Sri Ajay Kumar Singh Yadav, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-opposite party.
2. The present intra-court appeal is directed against the order dated 27.05.2024 passed by learned Single Judge of the Court in Writ Appeal No. 5001 of 2024 [ Prem Chandra Verma Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others ].
3. A perusal of the records of the case indicates that the writ petition had been instituted praying for a mandamus to be issued to the Joint Director, Technical Education, E
Judicial review of disciplinary matters is limited, with courts respecting the wide discretion of disciplinary authorities unless procedural fairness is violated or penalties shock the conscience.
The court emphasized the necessity of adhering to principles of natural justice in disciplinary inquiries, asserting that findings must be supported by adequate evidence and fair procedures.
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....
The main legal point established in the given judgment is the limited scope of judicial review in disciplinary inquiries and the principles of proportionality and the Wednesbury rule.
Judicial review in disciplinary proceedings limited to process and natural justice; no re-appreciation of evidence or interference with punishment unless shocking to conscience or based on no evidenc....
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.
The High Court does not act as an appellate authority in disciplinary matters and will not interfere with the quantum of punishment unless it is shocking to the conscience.
The findings in the criminal and departmental proceedings were based on the same set of facts, and acquittal in a criminal case does not automatically entitle the individual to relief in departmental....
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
