Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR
Santosh Kumar Singh – Appellant
Versus
State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy./Prin. Secy. Appointment And Personnel Deptt. Lko – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J.
1. Heard Shri Ravi Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Shri Sudhir Kumar Singh, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-State.
FACTS AND RELIEFS SOUGHT
Reliefs Claimed in the Writ Petition
2. By means of the present petition, the petitioner has sought quashing of the impugned punishment order dated 10.09.2025 passed by respondent No. 2, as contained in Annexure-1 to the writ petition.
3. Another writ in the nature of certiorari has been sought for setting aside the consequential order dated 09.12.2025 passed by respondent No. 2, as contained in Annexure-2 to the writ petition, whereby the representation submitted by the petitioner against the punishment order has been rejected.
4. The petitioner has further prayed for issuance of a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents not to give effect to the impugned orders dated 10.09.2025 and 09.12.2025 and to restore all consequential service benefits, including the withheld increment, as if the impugned orders had never been passed.
Facts Giving Rise to the Present Petition
5. The brief facts of the case are that the District Magistrate, Lucknow, vide letter da
The failure to follow prescribed inquiry procedures and principles of natural justice invalidates disciplinary actions against government servants.
Disciplinary proceedings against government employees must adhere to procedural rules and principles of natural justice; failure to do so, especially with unexplained delays, renders the inquiry inva....
The mandatory nature of the procedure under Rule 7 of the Rules of 1999 in disciplinary proceedings and the requirement to adhere to natural justice principles.
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 disciplinary authority must provide reasons for disagreement with the inquiry report, record its own findings on the charges, and provide the government servant with an opportunity to file a writ....
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.
A valid departmental inquiry requires adherence to procedural safeguards, including the establishment proving charges through evidence, or it is deemed invalid.
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
