Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (0.24 seconds)
Jamal Daudbhai S/O Iqbalbhai vs State Of Gujarat on 17 August, 2022 cites

Rahul Aydanbhai Vank vs State Of Gujarat on 5 September, 2018

Yet in another decision again by the Division Bench of this Court rendered in Letters Patent Appeal No.841 of 2019 between Rahul Aydanbhai Vak v. State of Gujarat, decided on 15.4.2019, in which the same issue has been considered. The relevant discussion of the Division Bench in the said case is contained in Para.7, 8 and 9, in which in no uncertain terms, almost in similar set of circumstance, the Division Bench has clearly opined that full-scale departmental inquiry will have to be undertaken, if initiation of action on the basis of unsatisfactory work, gross negligence or indiscipline or any act which may tantamount to be stigmatic and as such, consistently this view has been clearly opined by the Division Bench.
Gujarat High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 94 - N V Anjaria - Full Document

Radhey Shyam Gupta vs U.P. State Agro Industries Corporation ... on 15 December, 1998

5.5 In Ratnesh Kumar Choudhary (supra) also the Supreme Court considered its own various decisions on the aspect and after referring to the decision in Radhey Shyam Gupta v. U.P. State Agro Industries Corpn. Ltd. [(1999) 2 SCC 21] observed that the proposition of law operating two ways. In certain cases of temporary servants and probationers if the inquiry undertaken about the very conduct forms the motive of termination order, then the termination could not be said to be punitive merely because principles of natural justice have not been followed. In such circumstances, without becoming stigmatic, the employer can exercise its right to terminate service of the employee concerned. In the other line of decisions, the Supreme Court has ruled that if the facts revealed in the inquiry or Page 8 of 18 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 18 20:21:17 IST 2022 C/SCA/8606/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/08/2022 from the narration of the order itself that the inquiry into the conduct was not the motive but it was a foundation and the allegation of misconduct considered against employee becomes foundation of termination of service of temporary servant or probationer, such action would become punitive and it would make the order legally unsound.
Supreme Court of India Cites 17 - Cited by 126 - M J Rao - Full Document

Chaitanya Prakash & Anr vs H.Omkarappa on 12 January, 2010

"8. Even decision relied by learned Assistant Government Pleader in the case of Chaitanya Prakash and Another v. H. Omlarappa reported in (2010) 2 SCC 623 quotes decision in the case of Pavanendra Narayan Verma vs. Sanjay Gandhi PGI of Page 11 of 18 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 18 20:21:17 IST 2022 C/SCA/8606/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/08/2022 Medical Sciences [(2002) 1 SCC 520] where three tests are enumerated to determine whether in substance an order of termination is punitive or not. We find in the present case all above tests namely a full scale formal inquiry, allegation involving moral turpitude or misconduct and culminating into guilt stands satisfied and therefore we have no hesitation to hold that the learned Single Judge committed no error of fact or law or jurisdiction warranting interference in this appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent."
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 106 - M Sharma - Full Document

Vadodara Municipal Corporation vs Manish Nayanbhai Mod on 25 January, 2017

8. The bone of contention of appellants - State authorities is that since the original petitioners Page 14 of 18 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 18 20:21:17 IST 2022 C/SCA/8606/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/08/2022 are employed on a contract basis and fixed pay, the Department is not under an obligation to conduct a detailed full-scale departmental inquiry. Now, this contention has been the subject matter of scrutiny on earlier occasion before a Coordinate Bench in Letters Patent Appeal No.189 of 2018 between Vadodara Municipal Corporation v. Manishbhai Nayanbhai Modh, decided on 20.2.2018. The relevant observations contained in the said decision are reflecting in Para.4.1 which are also based upon the decision of the Apex Court and in consonance with the provision of the Gujarat Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1971. The said observations have also been considered at length by the learned Single Judge which are reflecting in Para. 5.7 of the impugned order. 9.
Gujarat High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 84 - S G Gokani - Full Document
1