Dismissed

Manjit Singh v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC11 Nov 2016LPA/2185/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This dismissed appeal addressed whether the Single Judge correctly relegated the appellant to an alternative remedy where the punishing authority might later act as an appellate member. The Court doubted this apprehension and disposed of the appeal based on the board’s duty to uphold natural justice.

What did the court decide?

The appeal stands disposed of with directions for the Board to exclude the Managing Director from appellate proceedings.

Manjit Singh Vs State of Punjab and… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Letters Patent Appeal No.2185 of 2016 (O&M) Date of Decision: November 11, 2016

¶3

Manjit Singh ......Appellant

¶4

versus

¶5

State of Punjab and others .....Respondents

¶6

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUDIP AHLUWALIA.

¶7

¶8

Present: Mr.S.P.Soi, Advocate, for the appellant.

¶9

-.-

¶10

Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶11

To be referred to the Reporters or not?

¶12

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶13

¶14

Surya Kant, J . (Oral)

¶15

Learned Single Judge vide order under appeal dated 07.10.2016 has relegated the appellant to the alternative remedy of appeal which is available under the Service Rules against the order of punishment inflicted by way of departmental enquiry. The apprehension of the appellant is that the Managing Director of the respondent-Federation who has imposed the punishment would also sit as a member of the Appellate Authority, namely, the Board of Directors. Such an apprehension can be effectively taken care as he may represent to the Board of Directors requesting that the Managing Director may not participate in the proceedings at the time of hearing of his appeal.

¶16

We have no reason to doubt that the Board of Directors or the Managing Director will appreciate the principles of natural justice and fair play and the Punishing Authority would not become member of the

¶17

Mohinder Kumar Kamboj 2016.11.28 15:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

¶18

[2]

¶19

LPA No.2185 of 2016 (O&M)

¶20

Appellate Authority while considering the validity of its own order.

¶21

With these observations and directions, the appeal stands

¶22

disposed of.

¶23

[SURYA KANT] JUDGE

¶24

November 11, 2016 [SUDIP AHLUWALIA] mohinder JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No

¶25

Mohinder Kumar Kamboj 2016.11.28 15:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

Manjit Singh v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manjit Singh v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mangal Singh & Ors. Vs Union of India & Ors.

Pushpa Devi Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Jormal & Ors. Vs State of Haryana & Others

Kuldip Kaur and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Mahender Kalra and Anr. Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Mantripat Kaur and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.