Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Rohinton Fali Nariman, Sanjay Kishan Kaul, JJ
Ram Naresh Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
M.A.No.248/2017|SLP(C) No. 32228/2016|WP(C)NO.1256/2013
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Umang Shankar
The court upheld the High Court's modification of a dismissal penalty to compulsory retirement with consequential benefits after the petitioner pleaded guilty to abandoning his post, finding no grounds for further interference.
Headnote:(A) Service Law - Disciplinary Action - Dismissal from service - Modification of penalty to compulsory retirement by the High Court with consequential benefits is upheld where the petitioner pleaded guilty to abandoning his post, and no reason to interfere with the concurrent findings exists. (Para 1)
Issues: Whether the dismissal of the petitioner, modified to compulsory retirement by the High Court, warranted interference by the Supreme Court.
Legal Category Hierarchy
-
practice and procedure
- restoration of petition
- dismissal for default
-
administrative law
-
disciplinary proceedings
- punishment
-
disciplinary proceedings
UPON perusing papers the Court made the following
O R D E R
Nobody appears even on second call.
Delay condoned.
The present application is for restoration of the special leave petition to file, which was dismissed for default of appearance on 26th October, 2016. We restore the special leave petition to the file and allow the application. However, having gone through the impugned judgment passed by the High Court, and having regard to the fact that the petitioner pleaded guilty to having left his post for a period of two hours and that, on disciplinary grounds he was dismissed, which was ultimately modified to compulsory retirement by the High Court with all consequential benefits, we see no reason to interfere. The special leave petition is, therefore, dismissed on merits.
