Judgments - Removal from Service
STANDARD CHARTERED BANK VERSUS R.C. SRIVASTAVA
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS. VERSUS SOMDUTT SHARMA
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. VERSUS DALBIR SINGH
Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Limited and another Versus Anil Kanwariya
MOHD SHAMIM & ORS VERSUS DELHI WAQF BOARD & ANR
UTTAR PRADESH JAL VIDYUT (S)NIGAM LIMITED & ORS. VERSUS BALBIR SINGH
RANBIR SINGH VERSUS EXECUTIVE ENG.P.W.D.
The State of M.P. & Ors. Versus Yogesh Pathak
Law laid down:- (i) If the purpose of the enquiry is not to find out the truth of the allegations of misconduct but to decide whether to retain the employee against whom a cloud is raised on his conduct such enquiry only serves as a motive for the termination. But where the enquiry is held wherein on the basis of the evidence a definite finding is reached at the back of the employee about his misconduct and such finding forms the Full Judgment
Suraj Pal Singh Rathor vs. M.P. High Court and another
Law laid down - The scope of interference in a writ petition against the order of punishment passed in the departmental inquiry is limited. The Court does not sit in appeal against the order passed in the departmental inquiry. Unless it is shown by the petitioner that the inquiry was not conducted in accordance with the prescribed procedure or there was any violation of the principles of natural justice, no interference in the inquiry proceeding is required. Interference in the departmental Full Judgment
Amit Chaurasia Vs. The State of M.P. & another
Law laid down - Applying an exception for not conducting a regular departmental enquiry to dismiss or remove a person or to reduce him in rank. For major penalties there must be some strong and cogent reason with the Authority competent to impose such punishment and should be assigned in writing as to why enquiry is not reasonable and practicable to be held. Imposing major penalties applying the exception of Article 311(2)(b) of the Constitution of India is always a ground of Full Judgment
Anand Kumar Singh Vs. The State Of Bihar and Ors
Praveen Garg vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and two others
Central Coalfields Limited Through its Chairman and Managing Director & Ors. Versus Smt. Parden Oraon
Dr. Manish Kumar Pandit Versus State of Chhattisgarh
RAM SINGH VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS
MANMOD SHANKAR VERSUS LIC OF INDIA & ANR
HC RAM NARESH VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS
BHOPAL SINGH VERSUS DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND ORS
Ram Karan Dwivedi Vs. State of M.P. and others
Law Laid Down :- Constitutional Court while exercising its jurisdiction of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution would not normally interfere where the enquiry was held by competent authority and where the rules of natural justice were followed or where the finding arrived at by the authority are based on evidence. The Court although cannot sit in appeal over the findings recorded by the Disciplinary Authority or the Enquiry Officer in a departmental enquiry, it does not mean that Full Judgment