Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
ANISH KUMAR GUPTA
Chandra Bhushan Singh Mahur – Appellant
Versus
State Of Uttar Pradesh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the disciplinary actions against the petitioner. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. arguments regarding fairness and procedure in the inquiry. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 3. analysis of procedural compliance with the disciplinary rules. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. final conclusions and orders regarding petitions. (Para 15 , 16 , 17) |
JUDGMENT :
ANISH KUMAR GUPTA, J.
1. Heard Sri Bhupesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Vishal Singh, learned Standing Counsel for the State.
2. Both the aforementioned petitions have been filed by the petitioner herein, the first petition being Writ- A No. 12078 of 2024 has been filed challenging the order dated 05.10.2023, whereby the penalty of withholding the two increments of the petitioner and a censure entry was made against the petitioner herein and second Writ-A No. 15424 of 2025 has been filed by the petitioner for seeking a direction to the respondent no.1 to decide the representation of the petitioner dated 27.08.2025 with regard to payments of leave encashment, gratuity, etc. and fixation of the regular pension to the petitioner.
3. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner had been working as Se
Disciplinary proceedings must adhere to procedural fairness, but the absence of witness examination does not automatically void an inquiry if the charged party fails to propose witnesses.
The failure to follow prescribed inquiry procedures and principles of natural justice invalidates disciplinary actions against government servants.
The court established that an oral inquiry is essential in disciplinary proceedings, and its absence violates natural justice, invalidating any resultant punishment.
A valid departmental inquiry requires adherence to procedural safeguards, including the establishment proving charges through evidence, or it is deemed invalid.
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.
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....
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
