Limitation Act | Litigant Cannot Be Punished For Court's Own Docket Load: J&K High Court Illicit Affair Alone Cannot Make a Man Guilty of Abetting Suicide: Supreme Court Quashes Charge Under Section 306 IPC Landlord Cannot Be Punished for Slowness of Courts: Supreme Court on Bonafide Need in Eviction Suits Expect States To Enact Laws Regulating Unlicensed Money Lenders Charging Exorbitant Interest Contrary To 'Damdupat': Supreme Court Accused Who Skips Lok Adalat After Seeking It, Then Cries 'Prejudice', Cannot Claim Apprehension of Denial of Justice: Madras High Court Refuse To Transfer Case IO Cannot Act Without Prior Sanction: Gujarat High Court Grants Bail, Flags Procedural Lapse in Religious Conversion Case Electricity Board Strictly Liable For Unprotected Transformer, 7-Year-Old Cannot Be Guilty Of Contributory Negligence: Allahabad High Court POCSO Conviction Can't Stand For Offence Not Charged: Delhi High Court Member of Unlawful Assembly Cannot Escape Conviction By Claiming He Only Carried a Lathi and Struck No One: Allahabad High Court Jurisdiction Cannot Be Founded On Casual Or Incidental Facts If Not Have A Direct Nexus With The Lis: : Delhi High Court Clause Stating Disputes "Can" Be Settled By Arbitration Is Not A Binding Arbitration Agreement: Supreme Court State Cannot Plead Helplessness Against Sand Mafia; Supreme Court Warns Of Paramilitary Deployment, Complete Mining Ban In MP & Rajasthan Authority Cannot Withdraw Subsidy Citing Non-Compliance When It Ignored Repeated Requests For Inspection: Supreme Court Out-of-State SC/ST/OBC Candidates Cannot Claim Rajasthan's Reservation Benefits in NEET PG Counselling: Rajasthan High Court Supreme Court Upholds Haryana's Regularisation Of Qualified Ad Hoc Staff As 'One-Time Measure', Strikes Down Futuristic Cut-Offs

Punjab and Haryana High Court Dismisses Writ Petition, Affirms Authority’s Decision to Order Fresh Inquiry

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking the quashing of a chargesheet and dismissal order in the case of Sawran Singh versus State of Punjab and another. Justice Pankaj Jain, presiding over the case, upheld the authority’s decision to order a fresh inquiry after the petitioner raised concerns about fairness during the initial proceedings.

Justice Jain stated in the judgment, “The authority acted in accordance with the regulations by ordering a fresh inquiry when the petitioner raised concerns about fairness. The right to receive the report of the Inquiry Officer is an essential part of the reasonable opportunity of defending oneself.”

The petitioner, who was employed as a Clerk with the respondent Board, had been served with a chargesheet on July 30, 1990. Following a departmental inquiry, the petitioner was found guilty, leading to the issuance of a dismissal order. However, the petitioner alleged that he was not dealt with fairly during the inquiry and pleaded innocence.

After considering the petitioner’s concerns, the authority opted to withdraw the show cause notice and ordered a fresh inquiry. Despite being aware of the proceedings, the petitioner deliberately chose not to participate in the second inquiry. Consequently, the authority dismissed the petitioner from services based on the fresh inquiry report.

The court emphasized the importance of providing a fair opportunity for the delinquent employee to respond to the findings of the inquiry officer before the authority made its own conclusions. Justice Jain added, “Denial of this right would be a denial of fair opportunity and natural justice.”

The judgment cited legal precedents, including the Constitution Bench decision in Managing Director, ECIL, Hyderabad vs. B. Karunakaran, to support the conclusion that the authority’s action was in line with the principles of natural justice.

Date of decision : 11.05.2023

Sawran Singh   vs State of Punjab and another

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Swaran-vs-State-PH-HC-15-May1.pdf"]

Latest Legal News