Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
SHEEL NAGU, VIRENDER SINGH
Rajendra Prasad Chourey, S/o. Gulab Das Chourey – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India Through General Manager Security Paper Mill (M.P.) – Respondent
ORDER :
The petitioner invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India assails the order dated 10.7.2000 (Annexure P-7) by which the employer invoking Section 19 (1) of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules 1965 (for brevity, ‘CCS Rules’) dismissed the petitioner from service for being involved in grave misconduct arising from judgment dated 7.6.2000 vide Crime No.58/1999 by which petitioner was convicted for offence punishable under Section 307 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for 3 years in ST No. 60/1995 passed by First Additional Sessions Judge, Hoshangabad.
2. Learned counsel for rival parties are heard on the question of admission as well as final disposal.
3 The sole contention of learned counsel for petitioner is that reasonable opportunity of being heard was not afforded prior to passing of impugned order of dismissal from service. It is submitted that against the aforesaid judgment of conviction of learned Trial Judge under Section 307 of IPC , the petitioner unsuccessfully approached the High Court in Cr.A. No.1509/2000 which suffered dismissal. However, on approaching the Apex Court in Cr
Disciplinary action based on criminal conviction requires adherence to principles of natural justice, mandating a reasonable opportunity for the employee to contest the penalty imposed.
The disciplinary authority must evaluate circumstances before imposing penalties on government servants convicted in criminal cases, ensuring adherence to principles of natural justice and proportion....
Departure from regular disciplinary inquiry under Rule 14(ii) RS(D&A) Rules requires specific recorded reasons for impracticability; vague satisfaction invalidates removal order, especially with crim....
Departure from regular disciplinary enquiry under Rule 14(ii) requires reasoned satisfaction of impracticability; mere staff anger insufficient, mandating compliance with natural justice and Article ....
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
