Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
India decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The Supreme Court held that the Visitor, as appointing authority for the First Registrar, could approve termination under the transitional provisions and the General Clauses Act, but left the High Court’s operative directions undisturbed.
The High Court Division Bench erred by reappreciating evidence and disturbing concurrent findings of fact recorded by the disciplinary, appellate and revisional authorities which were founded on relevant material and, after independent forensic verification by Bihar Police, established that the two identities were the same person; the dismissal was the result of a fair and lawful enquiry and is restored; the Patna District appointment (Order No.10524 of 2007) and the appointment of "Santosh Kumar" as Constable in Bihar are quashed; competent police authorities are directed to examine and take…
Source excerpt
The Inquiry Officer’s finding that the Medical Certificate (Ex. P-7) was not genuine was perverse and not supported by credible evidence because (i) the doctor admitted treating the appellant, owning the letterhead and the rubber stamp, (ii) disputed and undisputed signatures were not properly compared and were only broadly similar, and (iii) the Inquiry Officer ought to have referred the disputed handwriting to an expert before concluding fabrication. Consequently the forgery charge was not proved, the disciplinary findings could not be sustained, and the dismissal was set aside with directi…
Source excerpt
The High Court orders setting aside the departmental findings and ordering reinstatement were unsustainable because due process was followed, witnesses (loanees) deposed that money was paid to the respondent to facilitate sanction of loans, the disciplinary findings were supported on preponderance of probabilities (not requiring proof beyond reasonable doubt), the respondent's statements before the Disciplinary Authority indicated remorse/admission, and the Appellate Authority had validly reduced dismissal to removal with superannuation benefits; therefore the Appellate Authority's order date…
Source excerpt
Non-furnishing of a preliminary inquiry report does not vitiate a regular inquiry if the inquiry officer did not rely upon it and the charged officer was supplied the witness deposition and allowed cross-examination; however, Regulation 6(17)’s requirement that the Inquiry Officer shall generally question the charged officer on circumstances appearing in the evidence (where the charged officer has not examined himself) is mandatory and failure to do so vitiates the inquiry; additionally, where the disciplinary authority considered a CVC recommendation in altering punishment it must be furnish…
Source excerpt
Reading Rule 13(2) together with Rule 14 and Appendix 3 of the CCS CCA Rules, an authority empowered to inflict minor penalties (here, the General Manager) may institute disciplinary proceedings and issue a charge-sheet for major penalties; therefore the charge-sheets issued by the General Manager were valid and the High Court erred in setting aside the CAT order.
Source excerpt
Because the Respondent Bank had itself acknowledged that the case involved a vigilance angle and had sought the CVC's first-stage advice, it was not open to the Bank to serve the charge sheet without first receiving and considering that advice; serving the charge sheet under those circumstances was mala fide and arbitrary, and therefore the disciplinary proceedings and charge sheet were quashed; the appellant is entitled to retirement benefits but not to back wages.
Source excerpt
Given the detailed inquiry report exonerating the appellant on overlapping charges, the cryptic and prejudicial nature of the disagreement note, the long delay (over 40 years) and the appellant’s retirement and advanced age, it would be unduly harsh to subject the appellant to a fresh disagreement exercise; therefore the High Court’s grant of liberty to issue a fresh disagreement note is set aside, the writ petition is allowed, the quashing of the punishment is affirmed and the appellant is entitled to consequential benefits including revision of pension.
Source excerpt
The charges against the Appellant were held to be allegations of a wrongful quasi-judicial order passed in good faith without evidence of extraneous influence or gratification and thus do not fall within the K.K. Dhawan exceptions to warrant disciplinary proceedings; further, there was an unexplained inordinate delay of 14 years in initiating departmental proceedings when the alleged misconduct was within the department's knowledge, and such delay justified quashing the State's appeal and restoring the Single Judge's order quashing the chargesheet.
Source excerpt
On the facts and having regard to the governing rules, initiation of disciplinary proceedings was valid: the Chief Minister approved the proposal which included the draft charge-sheet, suspension and appointments for inquiry, and Rule 55 of the 1930 Rules did not mandate that the charge-sheet be separately issued or approved by the appointing authority; therefore the High Court erred in quashing the dismissal for lack of Chief Minister's approval and the appeal is allowed.
Source excerpt
Explore more
