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

Supreme Court Emphasizes 'Limited Scope of Judicial Review' in Departmental Inquiries, Sets Aside High Court Order

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark judgment dated August 24, 2023, the Supreme Court emphasized the "limited scope of judicial review" in departmental inquiries and set aside the orders of both the learned Single Judge and the Division Bench. The case involved a departmental inquiry against a bank official for alleged misconduct, including the non-submission of control forms and transgression of the area of operation.

The Court stated, "The Court's role is not to act as an appellate body or to re-appreciate evidence but to ensure that the findings of the inquiry are based on some evidence." This observation was made in the context of the limited scope of judicial review against departmental inquiry proceedings. [Para 36, Page 31]

The learned Single Judge had earlier found justification in specific aspects of the departmental inquiry. The Supreme Court expressed satisfaction with the Enquiry Report, stating, "The Court expressed satisfaction with the Enquiry Report, which fortified the conclusions of the learned Single Judge." [Para 15-17, Page 11]

On the topic of severability of charges and penalties in disciplinary proceedings, the Court clarified, "If the penalty can be imposed based on the charges that are proved and if such a penalty is lawfully sustainable, then it is not for the Court to consider whether those grounds alone would have weighed with the disciplinary authority in imposing the punishment." [Para 38-39, Page 32]

Supreme Court concluded by setting aside the orders of the learned Single Judge and the Division Bench, thereby dismissing Writ Petition No. 29547 of 1997 filed by the respondent. The Court allowed the appeal and clarified that there would be no order as to costs. [Para 41, Page 35]

Date of Decision August 24, 2023

State Bank of India vs A.G.D. Reddy

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/24-Aug-2023_SBI_VS_AG_Reddy.pdf"]

Latest Legal News