Punjab and Haryana High Court Quashes Dismissal Order, Citing Violation of Natural Justice

Share:
senior bail finger bail public accused 202 Voter Tenant Imagination Constitutional Law landlord 90 rti Punishment jails cheque compromise medical injury station evidence ada motor employee Right Punjab evidence wife penalty Punjab suicide 1 students vamendment la nd 44 fir suit interim consideration evidence property food financialfinancial Gram ginder wife order 202 natural DEMARCATION Property

In a significant ruling, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has set aside a dismissal order issued against Sheetal Sharma, citing a violation of natural justice. Justice Pankaj Jain, while delivering the judgment, stated, “The extreme punishment of dismissal awarded to a delinquent cannot be viewed lightly,” emphasizing the importance of conducting a proper inquiry before imposing such a severe penalty. The court further highlighted the need for adherence to the principles of natural justice in disciplinary proceedings.

The case pertained to Sheetal Sharma, who served as a Junior Assistant with respondent No. 3. She was booked in an FIR under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code at Police Station Sohana, District SAS Nagar Mohali, resulting in her arrest and subsequent judicial custody. Despite her custodial status, the department proceeded with an inquiry against her, which she argued was conducted without her knowledge or opportunity to defend herself effectively.

Justice Jain observed that the State, as the petitioner’s employer, should have been more considerate and pragmatic in handling the matter. “The State ought to have waited at least until the petitioner was bailed out from judicial custody,” remarked the judge. The court further pointed out that the petitioner had not been convicted in the criminal case, and until proven guilty, she could not be deemed a convict.

Highlighting the violation of natural justice, Justice Jain noted that the inquiry officer’s report and related documents were not supplied to the petitioner, contrary to the requirements of Article 311(2) of the Constitution. The court cited previous judgments, including Managing Director, ECIL, Hyderabad v. B. Karunahar (1993) 4 SCC 727, which stressed the importance of providing the accused with a fair and reasonable opportunity to defend themselves.

High Court set aside the dismissal order and subsequent order passed against Sheetal Sharma. The court granted the respondents the liberty to pass a fresh order in accordance with the law. This ruling emphasizes the significance of upholding principles of natural justice and ensuring a fair and just inquiry process in disciplinary proceedings.

Date of Decision: 31st May 2023

Sheetal Sharma @ Kanwaljeet Kaur VS State of Punjab and ors. 

Download Judgment

Share: