Back
VIVEK AGARWAL
Sanjay Sahu – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's service discharge orders addressed. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. contention regarding improper termination. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. exploration of article 311 applicability. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. analysis of appellate order and its implications. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 5. distinction between stigmatic and non-stigmatic orders. (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 6. final dismissal of the petition. (Para 14 , 15 , 16) |
ORDER
1. This petition is filed by one Sanjay Sahu S/o Shri Ramesh Sahu who was working as Lower Division Clerk being aggrieved of order dated 3.2.1995 passed by the Secretary, Lokayukta office, Bhopal (M.P.) whereby services of the petitioner were discharged while he was on probation on account of nonrequirement of his services.
2. Petitioner is also aggrieved of the order dated 6th November, 2006 passed by the Director General of Special Police Establishment, in the office of Lokayukta establishment, Bhopal (M.P.) whereby the Director General after taking note of the orders passed by the coordinate Bench of this High Court in W.P.(s) No. 332/2004 on 23.8.2006 observing that the appeal be decided within four months by a reasoned order, decided the appeal holding that there is no provision
The termination of a probationer’s service is not punitive and does not attract Article 311(2) unless it indicates misconduct. The nature of the termination must be assessed based on substance over f....
Service matter - Misconduct - Order of Termination from service quashed - Period of probation has been extended on account to their inefficient discharge of duty nor any record has been brought to sh....
Termination of a probationer does not require an inquiry unless it is punitive in nature; unsatisfactory performance alone does not constitute grounds for punitive action under Article 311(2).
If misconduct is the foundation to pass the order, then an enquiry into misconduct should be conducted and an action according to law should follow. But if it is (sic) notice, it is not incumbent upo....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the distinction between termination simpliciter and punitive termination based on the nature of the inquiry and the purpose of the termination.
Discharge of probationers is considered punitive when based on allegations of misconduct, requiring a proper inquiry under Article 311(2) of the Constitution.
Where the form of the order is merely a camouflage for an order of dismissal for misconduct it is always open to the Court before which the order is challenged to go behind the form and ascertain the....
The discharge of a probationer must comply with procedural requirements, and insufficient assessment of performance leads to implied confirmation, while discharge based on unsatisfactory work isn't p....
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
