Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
The Court observed that both parties had “occupied the time of the Bar Council of India, a High Court and this Court for eleven years”, time, it noted, “that belonged to other litigants, waiting for reliefs they genuinely need.”
by Sara Sundaram* and Nikunj Agarwal**
Delhi High Court has suspended DHJS officer Vinay Singhal with immediate effect pending disciplinary proceedings and barred him from leaving Delhi without prior permission.
The Rajasthan High Court held that disciplinary action against a quasi-judicial officer is permissible only where there is evidence of mala fide intent, conscious violation of law, or intent to grant undue benefit.
Supreme Court observed that the word “may” in Regulation 10, 1976 Regulations, from any standpoint, is directory and construing it as mandatory would remove the discretion available to the employer in dynamic circumstances.
The Court held that path from the proved fact of transfer of Rs 75,000 to the conclusion of bribery remains unexplained.
Initiation of administrative proceedings for disciplinary action against the appellant, we unhesitatingly hold, was bad in law and non est.
Bringing together significant service law rulings from the Supreme Court and various High Courts, this roundup offers brief summaries of the month’s important cases along with references to related roundups.
“The nature of the misconduct proved against the petitioner, viewed in the context of the duties and responsibilities attached to the post held, cannot be said to be trivial or inconsequential.”
During the COVID-19 pandemic, an MLA visited hospital and was annoyed that the Government Casualty Medical Officer did not rise upon his arrival. Thus, a Show Cause Notice was issued to him regarding initiation of disciplinary proceedings.
“There is nothing in the Passport Act which even remotely suggests that pendency of disciplinary or vigilance proceedings would stand as an absolute bar for grant of passport.”
Justice Sanjeev Kumar has been placed in suspension following a disciplinary proceeding.
The Senior Civil Judge had allegedly threatened a police officer over a phone call in a complaint case filed against his sister.
“The precious time of this Court has been wasted in adjudicating this avoidable piece of litigation which the petitioner was compelled to initiate due to cause given by the respondents in blatant violation of law.”
“It is settled proposition of law that where no limitation period is prescribed, authorities are bound to act within reasonable period. The reasonable period depends upon facts and circumstances of each case, there is no hard and fast or straitjacket formula.”
“The then SP Datia has no regards for the law of land, and he is in habit of functioning as a Police Officer according to his own whims and wishes, thereby giving a complete go-by to the law of the land.”
“It is only in rare and exceptional cases that the Court may substitute its own view as to the quantum of punishment.”
“A disciplinary proceeding should not resemble a point-to-point bullet train journey. A charge memo need not necessarily culminate in punishment.”
“Recording of reasons in orders is equally important as giving an opportunity of hearing. The reasons in order means link between material which the forum considered while reaching the conclusion and reveals a rational nexus between the two.”
The Court noted that the report of Administrative Judge with regard to work and conduct of the petitioner was also without granting him an opportunity of being heard.