Procedural lapses do not vitiate inquiry without real prejudice: Bombay HC quashes reinstatement of school peon
The Court held that the School Tribunal’s approach was perverse as it overlooked the actual charges against the peon.
The Court held that the School Tribunal’s approach was perverse as it overlooked the actual charges against the peon.
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.
The Court held that path from the proved fact of transfer of Rs 75,000 to the conclusion of bribery remains unexplained.
“The fact that the same authority first remanded the matter for enhanced punishment and then, being dissatisfied even with the enhanced penalty of four increments, proceeded suo motu to impose the maximum penalty of dismissal, raises a serious doubt regarding the objectivity and fairness of the process.”
Allahabad High Court directed the standing counsel to file a counter affidavit within four weeks. A rejoinder affidavit, if any, was permitted to be filed within two weeks thereafter.
“The High Court can interfere with the order of punishment only in case of violation of the provisions of rules or principles of natural justice are proved.”
“The punishment of dismissal in the present case shocks the conscience of this court because the punishment is shockingly disproportionate.”
While Justice Bela M. Trivedi took a stern note of the actions of the errant advocates, Justice Satish Chandra Sharma accepted the unconditional apology.
“The candidates have been emboldened in taking recourse to forged documents for securing public appointment by a belief that under any eventuality, no harsh action shall be taken against them in case they feel sorry, or they withdraw their petition.”
A party to the proceedings being not informed of the jurisdictional authority which decides the complaint itself is fatal to all norms of fairness.
“While it is acknowledged that doctors are expected to apply a reasonable level of expertise and exercise due diligence in their practices, their conduct must not be judged against preconceived notions of a specific procedure or outcome.”
The Court observed that once the employee had already suffered dismissal from service on account of unauthorized absence, that sin stood expiated and was no longer a relevant consideration while assessing his case for grant of compassionate allowance.
The Registrar directed the law student to vacate the hostel accommodation on the Student Disciplinary Committee’s recommendations due to non-cooperation in the inquiry.
“The Bar Council has to maintain professional standards and in the event of any complaint of misconduct, actions are to be initiated.”
The Court directed the revenue officer to undergo a six-month training program to improve their understanding of judicial and quasi-judicial responsibilities when they pleaded inability to understand court order to reopen mutation file.
“The action of the Lucknow University in not only in violation of principle of nature justice but has deleterious effect on the future of the candidate and such an action is deplorable.”
“The case of the prosecution is that News Nation, a TV news channel operation titled ‘Kala Pani’ allegedly showing some of the employees of Delhi Prisons interacting with reporters. Some of the employees allegedly accepting bribe money for extending favours inmates contrary to the Delhi Prisons Rules.”
The Court referred to MAT’s finding that the petitioners were empowered to terminate the services of a probationer in case of misconduct, provided that such misconduct is proved after an opportunity of being heard is availed to the respondent. However, the same was not followed by the petitioners.
The Court observed that the Labour Court’s Award is not happily worded, especially where it holds that in absence of a police complaint, employee’s act of overwriting on gate pass cannot be considered forgery.
Plagiarism by any stretch of imagination will remain plagiarism, irrespective of where the material had been copied from and the quantum of such material copied, will not have any bearing or impact on the alleged misconduct of plagiarism itself.