Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW
AMITABH KUMAR RAI
Jai Prakash Verma – Appellant
Versus
State Of U.p. Through Secy Revneue – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
AMITABH KUMAR RAI, J.
1. Heard Sri Rahul Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri Nitin Mathur, learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State-respondent.
2. The instant writ petition has been filed seeking quashing of the punishment order of removal from service dated 02.08.1995 from the post of Collection Amin, as well as the order dated 27.11.2003 passed by the District Magistrate, Lakhimpur Kheri, whereby the representations of the petitioner dated 20.03.2002 and 18.03.2003 seeking re-employment in service were rejected.
3. The brief facts, shorn of unnecessary details, are that the petitioner was initially appointed to the post of Collection Amin in the year 1988 in Tehsil Dhauraha, District Lakhimpur Kheri. The petitioner was charge- sheeted and placed under suspension vide order dated 19.01.1994 on three charges; firstly, that during the period from 01.11.1993 to 31.12.1993, he made a recovery of only Rs.1,328/- against the outstanding main dues of Rs.46,436/- and a recovery of only Rs.495/- against miscellaneous dues amounting to Rs.2,45,565/-, which was much below the prescribed norms; secondly, that he failed to prepare the list of defaulters in respec
Disciplinary proceedings must adhere to principles of natural justice, including the right to a fair hearing and the requirement for oral evidence. Failure to comply renders the proceedings and resul....
Disciplinary proceedings quashed for defective charge memo without imputations, documents, witnesses; no departmental evidence or witnesses; perfunctory enquiry report lacking independent reasons and....
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.
The court established that an oral inquiry is essential in disciplinary proceedings, and its absence violates natural justice, invalidating any resultant punishment.
The court reaffirmed that disciplinary proceedings must strictly adhere to procedural requirements, including proper approval of chargesheets and the necessity of oral enquiries, to ensure fairness a....
Rule 7(vii) provides that where charged government servant denies charges, enquiry officer shall proceed to call witnesses proposed in charge sheet.
The failure to follow prescribed inquiry procedures and principles of natural justice invalidates disciplinary actions against government servants.
Penalty – Recording of evidence in a disciplinary proceeding proposing charges of a major punishment is mandatory – Even in an ex-parte inquiry, it is sine qua non to record evidence of witnesses for....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that in a disciplinary proceeding, the charged officer must be provided with an opportunity to defend against the evidence presented by the prosecu....
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
