Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.21 seconds)
State Of Haryana & Another vs Shree Krishan (Deceased) Through His ... on 3 February, 2014 cites

Sawai Singh vs State Of Rajasthan on 2 May, 1986

"5. It is now well settled that a disciplinary enquiry has to be a quasi-judicial enquiry held according to the principles of natural justice and the enquiry officer has a duty to act judicially. Perusal of the enquiry report would reveal that it has not been prepared in accordance with the provisions of Rule 8(23) of the Rules inasmuch as it does not contain the articles of charge and the statement of imputation of misconduct and misbehaviour distinctly. The Supreme Court in Sawai Singh v. State of Rajasthan, AIR 1986 SC 995 has been pleased to hold that where the charges framed against the delinquent officer were vague and no allegations regarding it have been made by him before the enquiry officer or before the High Court, the fact that he has participated in the enquiry would not exonerate the department to bring home the charges. The enquiry based on such charges would stand vitiated being not fair, and further that the report of the enquiry officer finding the delinquent official guilty could not be sustained as the charges were vague and it was difficult to meet the charges fairly by the delinquent official. The case in hand is squarely covered by the abovesaid judgment.
Supreme Court of India Cites 5 - Cited by 198 - S Mukharji - Full Document

Workmen Of Messrs Firestone Tyre ... vs Management & Others (With Connected ... on 6 March, 1973

10. Counsel for the workman was right in holding out that in view of the judgment of the Apex Court in M/s Fire Stone Tyre & Rubber Company of India Vs. The Management & others AIR 1973 SC 1227, the Labour Court could reappraise the evidence to verify the correctness of findings and come to the conclusion whether the enquiry proceedings are valid or not. It was further held that when the enquiry is held to be defective, it was open for the employer to prove before the Tribunal, the misconduct of the employer and whether it stood proved and the workman had to be given opportunity to lead evidence to the counter that also. Thus, the Management was within its right to lead further evidence, thereafter also after the issue had been decided against it on 28.12.1998. Once the said report became final inter se the parties, the conclusion arrived at by the Labour Court cannot be faulted. Nothing came from the testimony of Dayal Singh, Inspector who was examined on 18.01.2000; rather in his statement, it further came that he had not compared the cash and the unsold tickets, which was the ground for disbelieving the enquiry report.
Supreme Court of India Cites 32 - Cited by 654 - Full Document

The State Of Haryana And Another vs Mohan Singh And Another on 15 October, 2012

9. From the above facts, it would be clear that the Labour Court has examined the issue in detail and come to the conclusion that the enquiry proceedings were violative of the principles of natural justice and proper procedure was not followed and no categorical finding was arrived at that there was any misappropriation since the cash was not compared to find out whether there was any shortage and the statements of the passengers were never recorded by the checking team. Reliance upon the judgment of this Court in State of Haryana Vs. Mohan Singh 1985 (2) SLR 116 by the counsel for the deceased-workman is well founded. It was held in the said judgment that since the statement of the passengers, who concededly gave a sum to the Conductor, was never recorded and it was held that the termination of the services of the Conductor on the said basis was not sustainable and the evidentiary value of the testimony has to be objectively considered. The Management, in the present case, had examined Chand Singh, Mohinder Pal and Dayal Singh and it had the freedom to examine other witnesses to prove the guilt of the workman but had failed to do so. Rather the inspecting team failed to record the statements of the bus passengers also. Finding on issue No.1 that the enquiry report was not fair, Sailesh ranjan 2014.02.19 12:54 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP No.6915 of 2001 (O & M) -7- arrived at on 28.12.1998, has never been challenged and even in the present writ petition, since the said order has not been impugned, the same had become final.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 1 - K Kannan - Full Document
1