Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 24 (0.28 seconds)
U N Tiwari vs Union Of India on 10 September, 2025 cites

State Of U.P. & Ors vs Saroj Kumar Sinha on 2 February, 2010

i) In the case of Om Kumar (supra), this Court, after considering the Wednesbury principles and the doctrine of proportionality, has observed and held that the question of quantum of punishment in disciplinary matters is primarily for the disciplinary authority and the jurisdiction of the High Courts under Article 226 of the Constitution or of the Administrative Tribunals is limited and is confined to the applicability of one or other of the well-known principles known as 'Wednesbury principles'.
Supreme Court of India Cites 5 - Cited by 718 - S S Nijjar - Full Document

Union Of India Etc vs Parma Nand Etc on 14 March, 1989

18.​ Learned counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, has placed reliance on the judgement of this Tribunal in O.A./1091/2010 wherein it has been observed that in a case of procedural provisions, which is not of a mandatory character, the complaint of violation of the rules has to be examined from the standpoint of substantial compliance and the order passed in violation of such a provision can be set aside only where such violation has occasioned and prejudiced to the delinquent employee. The Tribunal has further made note of the observation made by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of 'Union of India vs. Parma Nanda in Civil Appeal No.1709 of 1988 and Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.6998 of 1988 Parma Nanda vs State of Haryana and others' which is that "The jurisdiction of the Tribunal to interfere with the disciplinary matters or punishment cannot be equated with an appellate jurisdiction. The Tribunal cannot interfere with the findings of the Inquiry Officer or competent authority where they are not arbitrary or utterly perverse. The power to impose penalty on a delinquent officer is conferred on the competent authority either by an Act of legislature or rules made under the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution. If there has been an enquiry consistent with the rules and in accordance with the principles of natural justice what MADHU KUMARI Page 15 of 24 O.A./250/2011 punishment would meet the ends of justice is a matter exclusively within the jurisdiction of the competent authority. If the penalty can lawfully be imposed and is imposed on the proved misconduct, the Tribunal has no power to substitute its own discretion for that of the authority. The adequacy of penalty unless it is mala fide is certainly not a matter for the Tribunal to concern itself with. The Tribunal also cannot interfere with the penalty if the conclusion of the Inquiry Officer or of the competent authority is based on evidence even if some of it is found to be irrelevant or extraneous to the matter."
Supreme Court of India Cites 27 - Cited by 164 - K J Shetty - Full Document

The State Of Karnataka vs N.Gangaraj on 14 February, 2020

"The disciplinary authority agreed with the findings of the enquiry officer and had passed an order of punishment. An appeal before the State Government was also dismissed. Once the evidence has been accepted by the departmental authority, in exercise of power of judicial review, the Tribunal or the High Court could not interfere with the findings of facts recorded by MADHU KUMARI Page 16 of 24 O.A./250/2011 re-appreciating evidence as if the Courts are the Appellate Authority. We may notice that the said judgment has not noticed larger bench judgments in S. Sree Rama Rao and B.C. Chaturvedi as mentioned above. Therefore, the orders passed by the Tribunal and the High Court suffer from patent illegality and thus cannot be sustained in law. Accordingly, appeal is allowed and orders passed by the Tribunal and the High Court are set aside and the order of punishment imposed is restored."
Supreme Court of India Cites 13 - Cited by 87 - H Gupta - Full Document

S.R.Tewari vs Union Of India & Anr on 28 May, 2013

22.​ In a catena of judgments by the Apex Court, it has been held that the judicial review in the disciplinary matters should not be in the form of re-appreciation of evidence. The Courts should only look at the correctness of process and not get into re-evaluation of evidence before the Inquiry Officer. The findings recorded by the Disciplinary Authority which are affirmed or diluted by the Appellate Authority/Revisional Authority should not be interfered with unless the applicant shows that the order is without jurisdiction; or that there is procedural irregularity in conducting MADHU KUMARI Page 18 of 24 O.A./250/2011 the enquiry. The Apex Court in the case of S.R.Tewari vs. Union of India 2013(7) Scale 417 has held as under:-
Supreme Court of India Cites 21 - Cited by 279 - B S Chauhan - Full Document

State Bank Of India & Ors vs Ramesh Dinkar Punde on 11 August, 2006

Apurba Kumar Saha; (1994) 2 SCC 615, State Bank of India and Others v. Ramesh Dinkar Punde (2006) 7 SCC 212, State of Andhra Pradesh v. Sree Rama Rao; AIR 1963 SC 1723, Lakshmi Devi Sugar Mills Ltd. v. Pt. Ram Sarup; AIR 1957 SC 82, State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur v. Prabhu Dayal Graver, 1995(6) SCC (L&S) 279-1996(1) SLJ 145 (SC), Deokinandan Sharma v. UOI and Ors., 2000 SCC (L&S) 1079, State Bank of India vs. Ram Lal Bhaskar & Another (2011 STPL (web) 904) and Union of India & Ors. Vs. Raghubir Singh and another, CWP No. 1154/2014 decided on 06.05.2014 by Punjab and Haryana High Court, the underline theme is that the High Court/tribunal does not sit as an appellate authority over the findings of the disciplinary authority and so long as the findings of the disciplinary authority are supported by some evidence the High Court does not re-appreciate the evidence and come to a different and independent finding on the evidence. They have to see whether there is violation of natural justice and fair play or any procedural irregularity committed by the inquiry officer, Disciplinary authority and due procedure was adopted strictly in accordance with the service rule.
Supreme Court of India Cites 11 - Cited by 140 - H K Sema - Full Document
1   2 3 Next