Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

8. There may be a case where the report of the Union Public Service Commission is not relied upon by the disciplinary authority and in that case it is certainly not necessary to supply a copy of the same to the employee concerned. However, if it is relied upon, then a copy of the same must be supplied in advance to the employee concerned, otherwise, there will be violation of the principles of natural justice. This is also the view taken by this Court in S.N. Narula v. Union of India [(2011) 4 SCC 591]."

27. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of R.P. Singh (supra) has held as under:-

"12. We will be failing in our duty if we do not take note of the submission of Mr W.A. Qadri that the decision in S.N. Narula case [S.N. Narula v. Union of India, (2011) 4 SCC 591 : (2011) 1 SCC (L&S) 727] is not an authority because the Tribunal had set aside the order of the disciplinary authority on the ground that it was a non-speaking order. Be that as it may, when the issue was raised before this Court and there has been an advertence to the same, we are unable to accept the submission of Mr Qadri. The said decision in S.N. Narula case [S.N. Narula v. Union of India, (2011) 4 SCC 591 : (2011) 1 SCC (L&S) 727] is an authority for the proposition that the advice of UPSC, if sought and accepted, the same, regard being had to the principles of natural justice, is to be communicated before imposition of punishment."