Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TELANGANA
T.MADHAVI DEVI
K.Ravi Chandra – Appellant
Versus
State of Telangana – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner challenges punishment for unauthorized absence. (Para 1 , 3) |
| 2. petitioner argues against enhancement of punishment. (Para 2 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. petitioner claims double jeopardy and unfair treatment. (Para 6) |
| 4. government pleader defends the legality of the punishment. (Para 7) |
| 5. court finds no reason to interfere with the punishment. (Para 8) |
| 6. court dismisses appeal and affirms punishment. (Para 9) |
| 7. writ petition disposed of with no order as to costs. (Para 10) |
ORDER :
T. Madhavi Devi, J.
This Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a Writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings of the 3rd respondent in C.No.738/A4/2011-13 dt. 28.08.2013 imposing a punishment of censure and treating the period from 11.03.2011 to 30.11.2012 as ‘not on duty’ and the proceedings of the 2nd respondent in Rc.No.822/T3/2015 dt. 22.04.2016 in enhancing the punishment to that of PPI (postponement of increment) for 2 years without affect on future increments and pension and treating the period from 11.03.2011 to 29.11.2012 as ‘not on duty’ as illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and consequently to set aside the proceedings dt. 28.08.2013 and al
Administrative authorities have the power to enhance penalties following due process, and procedural fairness was upheld in disciplinary actions regarding employment leave and absence during service.
Unauthorized absence from duty, failure to abide by leave application directions, and pre-planned leave without proper sanction constitute gross indiscipline, misconduct, and dereliction of duty unde....
Disciplinary action must consider proportionality of punishment in light of circumstances, including health issues, and proper procedure must be followed to ensure fair treatment.
Disciplinary punishment must be proportionate to the offense, and dismissal for unauthorized absence is excessive compared to lesser disciplinary actions.
Disciplinary actions based on minor infractions require compelling justification and adherence to natural justice principles; absence due to illness is not willful misconduct.
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
