Back
VIVEK AGARWAL
LAXMAN PRASAD RAJAK – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
ORDER :
(Vivek Agarwal, J.)
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been denied the benefit of Kramonnati/Time Scale of Pay, which became due in favour of the petitioner in the year 2018. Vide judgment dated 29-8-2022 passed in Sessions Trial No. 23/2016, State vs. Laxman Prasad Rajak, the petitioner was convicted for the offence under section 409 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 with an imprisonment for five years and fine etc by the Court of learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Dindori. The aforesaid conviction will not relate back to the date of eligibility, which is since 2018 and, therefore, there being no retrospective application of the order of conviction and the petitioner should have been given the benefit of Time Scale of Pay.
2. Learned counsel for the respondents, in his turn, submits that the conviction of the petitioner will relate back to the date of registration of the offence, which is of the year 2015. The petitioner was arrested on 10-12-2015 and was given benefit of bail on 21-1-2016. He was in custody for a period of 42 days and by operation of the rules framed for suspension by virtue of he being in custody for more than 48 hours, he w
Past conduct, including criminal convictions, can justify the denial of promotions and benefits in employment.
An employee penalized for misconduct cannot retroactively claim promotion benefits, affirming that promotion eligibility is contingent upon an unblemished conduct record.
The punishment takes effect from the date of serving the order to the employee, and the currency of punishment may vary based on the nature of the punishment imposed.
Promotion cannot be denied solely due to pending criminal proceedings; a charge must be framed for such denial to be valid.
The pendency of preliminary investigation without submission of charge-sheet cannot be a ground to deny promotion to an employee who is found otherwise suitable for the same.
Indefinite withholding of promotion due to pending vigilance proceedings is unjust, and employees have a right to timely consideration for promotion, even when criminal proceedings are ongoing.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to communicate adverse reports to the concerned individual and the application of natural justice principles in considering promoti....
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
