93. The ratio of J.Ahmed (supra) in case taken into consideration then the facts and circumstances and the material on record do not constitute misconduct as the allegation relating to petitioner is lack of leadership qualities though that too seems to be not correct keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case."
In the case of A.L. Kalara vs. Project & Equipment Corporation (1984) 3 SCC 316: Hon'ble Supreme court has held that acts of misconduct must be precisely and specifically stated in rules or standing orders and can not be left to be interpreted ex-post facto by the management.
In the case of G.M. Appellate Authority,Bank of India vs. Mohd. Nizamuddin (2006) 7 SCC 410: Hon'ble Supreme court has held that, it is well settled law that gravity of misconduct has to be measured in terms of the nature of misconduct. (Para 9)
12. It is well settled proposition of law that right of citizen to approach higher judiciary or even subordinate courts in accordance with law for judicial review of the State actions, are covered by basic structure doctrine vide, 1973 (4) SCC 225: Kesavananda Bharati v. The State of Kerala; AIR 1980 SC 1789: Minerva Mills.