Writ petition allowed. Quashed an order stopping petitioner's increments and dismissal of his review due to violation of natural justice; enquiry report was not served with the show cause notice.
Petitioner's writ petition allowed; orders dated 04.09.2013 and 18.12.2013 set aside.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6042 of 2014
===========================================================
.... Petitioner
Versus
.... Respondents
=========================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner : Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Adv. For the Respondents : Mr. Kameshwar Kumar, GP. XVII with Mr. Rajesh Singh, AC to GP XVII
=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL JUDGMENT
Date: 06-10-2017
Heard both sides.
Patna High Court CWJC No.6042 of 2014 dt.06-10-2017
2
enquiry and this Court vide order, dated 01.04.2013, quashed the order for initiation of fresh enquiry and directed the disciplinary authority to pass order in accordance with law on the enquiry report. Thereafter, the disciplinary authority asked second show cause from the petitioner on 05.08.2013. The petitioner filed his reply on 17.08.2013 and stated that the second show cause is asked from him on 05.08.2013, but, the copy of the enquiry report is not served along with the second show cause.
Patna High Court CWJC No.6042 of 2014 dt.06-10-2017
3
contended that the disciplinary authority gave second show cause, but, when the attention of the learned counsel for the State is drawn to the show cause reply of the petitioner in which he specifically stated that the enquiry report was not given to him along with the show cause, the learned counsel for the State could not be able to show that the enquiry report was ever given to the petitioner.
Patna High Court CWJC No.6042 of 2014 dt.06-10-2017
4
Officer is right, but, the disciplinary authority did not provide sufficient opportunity by not serving the enquiry report to the petitioner and thereby the order inflicting punishment by stopping three increments of the petitioner with non-cumulative effect is bad on the ground of violation of principles of natural justice and the review order also suffers from illegality as no reason has been assigned as the review was summarily dismissed.
(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J)
SA/-
| AFR/NAFR | NAFR |
|---|---|
| CAV DATE | N/A |
| UploadingDate | 11.10.2017 |
| Transmission Date |
N/A |
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a disciplinary order deferring increments is sustainable when the disciplinary authority fails to serve the enquiry report along with the show cause notice.
Whether the principles of natural justice were violated by not providing the petitioner an opportunity to persuade the disciplinary authority regarding divergence from the enquiry report findings.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Nageshwar Yadav
The State Of Bihar
The Principal Secretary, Labour Resource Department
The Director Employment and Training
Prabhat Kumar Jha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
