Back
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Akhil Kumar Srivastava, Judicial Member, Mallika Arya, Administrative Member
B. Satayanarayan – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of misappropriation and disciplinary proceedings. (Para 1 , 2 , 4 , 9) |
| 2. parties' contentions on charges, enquiry, and limitation. (Para 3 , 5) |
| 3. no violation of natural justice due to admitted guilt. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 4. limited judicial review in disciplinary punishment proportionality. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 5. punishment proportionate to serious misconduct; oa dismissed. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
ORDER
By Mallika Arya, AM:
Through this Original Application, the applicant has challenged the order dated 02/04/2003 (Annexure A-1) passed by the Respondent No. 5 in compliance of order passed by this Tribunal in O.A. No. 203/00628/2022 vide order dated 17/11/2022. Respondent no. 3 has passed an order dated 23.01.2023 (Annexure A/2) wherein while deciding the representation (Annexure A/6) of the applicant he has stated as follows:
"there is no justifiable grounds to consider and decide the case in your favour and extend all service benefits including pension. Therefore, I decide that the order is not fit to be interfered with and the punishment of removal from service without compassionate allowance and granting all benefits including pension stands good. T
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
