Recovery Of Excess Payment Made By Mistake Is Permissible When Employee Furnished An Undertaking To Refund: Supreme Court Anticipatory Bail Application Under Sec 482 BNSS Is Maintainable Even If No Formal Order Of Arrest Is Passed By CGST Authorities: Allahabad High Court Consensual Physical Relationship Following Three-Year Courtship Does Not Amount To Rape If Marriage Promise Fails: Supreme Court Criminalization Of Civil Disputes | Courts Must Not Engage In Speculative Reasoning While Dealing With Quashing Petitions Under Section 482 CrPC: Supreme Court Mere Recovery Of Tainted Money In The Absence Of Proof Of Demand Is Insufficient To Sustain Conviction Under Section 7 And 13 PC Act: Supreme Court High Court Cannot Quash NDPS Proceedings Merely Relying On Jurisprudence Regarding Evidentiary Value Of Confessional Statements: Supreme Court Extra-Judicial Confession Made While In Police Custody Is Inadmissible In Evidence: Supreme Court Taxing Authorities Must Levy Tax Based On The Form Of Goods At The Time Of Sale, Not On Potential End Use: Supreme Court Punjab & Haryana High Court Orders CBI Probe Into State Corruption Scams After Punjab Police Fails To Act On ED’s Section 66(2) PMLA Referral Section 482 CrPC | FIR Based On Consensual Relationship Gone Sour Cannot Be Sustained To Coerce Marriage: Supreme Court CISF Personnel Soliciting Bribes For Employment Is Guilty Of 'Gross Misconduct' Under Section 18 CISF Act: Andhra Pradesh High Court PIL | State Cannot Use Demolition Powers To Silence Whistleblowers Or Deflect Accountability: Punjab & Haryana High Court Criminal Proceedings Against In-Laws Without Specific Allegations Of Overt Acts Constitute Abuse Of Process: Supreme Court Order 22 Rule 9 CPC | Admission In An Abated Suit Does Not Constitute Estoppel Against Landlord In A Fresh Eviction Proceeding: Calcutta High Court Arbitral Award Cannot Be Set Aside For Non-Adjudication Of Claims Specifically Abandoned By Parties: Delhi High Court Mere Long Possession Is Not Adverse Possession; Defendant Must Prove Hostile Animus To Deny Title Of True Owner: Himachal Pradesh High Court Reopening Of Assessment Under Sec 148A(d) Income Tax Act Cannot Be Based On 'Change Of Opinion' Without Fresh Tangible Material: Gujarat High Court Municipal Authorities Must Initiate Formal Proceedings And Grant Opportunity Of Hearing Before Sealing Premises:  Jharkhand High Court Court Cannot Compel Third-Party To Undergo DNA Test Unless Necessary For Just Adjudication: Madhya Pradesh High Court Trial Court Cannot Defer Bail Application Merely Because A Transfer Petition Is Pending In High Court: Punjab & Haryana High Court Section 108 BNS | Mere Taunts Or Harassment Regarding Not Bearing A Male Child Do Not Constitute Abetment To Suicide: Rajasthan High Court Daily-Wage Employees Treated As Permanent Under 1988 Government Resolution Entitled To Annual Increment Benefits: Supreme Court

Termination of the Services Without Holding Disciplinary Enquiry is Unjustified and Dehors the Requirements of Law: Supreme Court Reinstates Registrar of GB Pant Institute

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Supreme Court of India, in a recent ruling, underscored the principle of natural justice and the requirement for holding a proper disciplinary enquiry before terminating an employee, particularly in cases involving government or public sector entities. This judgement is particularly significant as it highlights the sanctity of procedural integrity in employment-related disputes.

The case revolved around Mr. Sandeep Kumar, who was terminated from his position as the Registrar of the GB Pant Institute of Engineering and Technology. His termination was contested on grounds of procedural irregularities, lack of disciplinary enquiry, and non-disclosure of crucial documents that allegedly demonstrated the legitimacy of his appointment. The appeal was directed against two judgements of the Uttarakhand High Court which had dismissed Kumar’s writ petition and subsequent review petition challenging his termination.

Suppression of Material Facts: The High Court had dismissed the writ petition on the basis of non-disclosure of the minutes from a crucial meeting which supported Kumar’s case, labeling it as suppression of material facts. The Supreme Court criticized this view, noting, “Non-placing of relevant documents on record, inadvertently, should not be a ground for dismissal when the minutes actually support the appellant’s case.”

Probation and Regularization: The appellant had been appointed on probation and had continued working beyond the probation period, which, according to his appointment letter, deemed his services to be regularized. The Court observed, “Termination without disciplinary enquiry or cause shown is deemed improper.”

Qualifications and Approval by the Board: Allegations concerning the appellant’s qualifications were addressed by a prior committee that confirmed the qualifications were genuine and satisfactory, contrary to the claims that led to his termination.

Decision: The Supreme Court ordered the reinstatement of Mr. Sandeep Kumar with all consequential benefits, stating that his termination was illegal and set aside both the impugned judgements of the High Court. Furthermore, the Court allowed the institute the liberty to initiate disciplinary proceedings, if deemed necessary, under proper legal norms.

Date of Decision: April 16, 2024.

Sandeep Kumar vs. GB Pant Institute of Engineering and Technology & Ors.

 

Latest Legal News