Back
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
T.S. SIVAGNANAM, CJ, CHAITALI CHATTERJEE (DAS), J
Union of India & Ors. – Appellant
Versus
R. Kasivelu – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. grounds for delay in appealing condoned. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. court addressed the proportionality of punishment and established that both employees faced similar disciplinary actions. (Para 5) |
| 3. both parties fined equally; disproportionality argued. (Para 6 , 7 , 12) |
| 4. judicial interference in disciplinary actions limited. (Para 8 , 10 , 11 , 14) |
| 5. judicial review of disciplinary actions is constrained to cases of extreme disproportionality. (Para 13) |
Mr. Indrajeet Dasgupta Mr. Uttam Basak ……….For the Appellants/Union of India Mr. Kedareswar Chakraborty …..For the Respondent (Judgment of the Court was delivered by T.S. SIVAGNANAM, C.J.)
In Re. I.A. No. CAN 1 of 2025
1. This intra-Court appeal has been filed challenging the order dated 26th June, 2024 in W.P.A. 23983 of 2014. The said writ petition was filed by the respondent herein challenging the order of punishment imposed upon him i.e. removal from service as well as the order passed by the appellate authority and the revisional authority confirming such punishment. The appeal filed by the Union of India & Ors. is time-barred and there is a delay of 144 days in filing the appeal. The respondent/writ petitioner has
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
