Mohammed Ashfaq vs State & Ors on 8 September, 2008
Postmastyer General, Hyderabad & Anr.) and 2007 (3)
RLW 1892 (Dharmendra Vs. Ganganagar Sugar Mills Ltd. &
Ors.) and submitted that according to these judgments,
it is clear that the departmental enquiry so conducted
against the petitioner is violative of Article 14 of
the Constitution of India. The Court is to see as to
whether non observance of any of the procedural
requirement is violative or not, if yes, then the
Court has to set aside the order of penalty. It is
further argued that High Court in exercise of power of
judicial review can interfere in a disciplinary matter
only when it finds that the findings recorded by the
enquiry officer and/or disciplinary authority are
based on no evidence and there are no material to
support the conclusions so arrived at or if the
10
material on which such conclusion has been reached was
such that no reasonable or prudent man on that basis
could have arrived at such conclusion. In present
case, obviously it is proved by the petitioner that no
misconduct has been committed by him for which such
harsh penalty of removal from service can be imposed,
therefore, the order of penalty deserves to be set
aside and the petitioner is entitled to be reinstated
in service.