The Reader

----- Original Message -----

From: Sameer.Pradhan@emerson.com

To: undisclosed-recipients:

Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 12:05 PM

Subject: [aurangabad_ca] Employee can't be sacked arbitrarily: Supreme Court

 

 

---

Employee can't be sacked arbitrarily: Supreme Court New Delhi: The Supreme Court has held principles of "natural justice" is a Constitutional requirement that has to be observed by government while taking disciplinary action against him or her. The apex court said the inquiry officer must act as a quasi-judicial authority and not as a representative of government while inquiry into the charges of misconduct against them. "Apart from the above by virtue of Article 311(2) of the Constitution of India, the departmental inquiry has to be conducted in accordance with rules of natural justice. It is a basic requirement of rules of natural justice that an employee be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard in any proceeding which may culminate in a punishment being imposed on the employee. "When a departmental inquiry is conducted against the government servant it cannot be treated as a casual exercise. The inquiry proceedings also cannot be conducted with a closed mind. The inquiry officer has to be wholly unbiased. The object of rules of natural justice is to ensure that a government servant is treated fairly in proceedings which may culminate in imposition of punishment including dismissal/removal from service," the apex court said in a judgement. The apex court made the remarks while dismissing an appeal filed by Uttar Pradesh government challenging the Allahabad High Court's judgement directing reinstatement of an employee Saroj Kumar Sinha.Sinha, working as an executive engineer in the state's Public Works Department, was sacked after being merely served with a chargesheet. He was sacked on December 24, 2004, on the basis of an ex-parte inquiry conducted against him even though Sinha had kept pleading for supply of documents to know the basis for the chargesheet. The High Court set aside his dismissal on the ground that the entire proceeding was "vitiated", after which the state government appealed in the apex court. Dismissing the government's appeal, the apex court said a perusal of the documents had revealed that despite the employee's repeated pleas no documents were given to him to enable him place his defence. Asking the respondent (employee) to give a reply to the inquiry report without supply of the documents is to add insult to injury, it said. "In our opinion, the actions of the inquiry officers in preparing the reports ex-parte without supplying the relevant documents has resulted in miscarriage of justice to the respondent. The conclusion is irresistible that the respondent has been denied a reasonable opportunity to defend himself in the enquiry proceedings," Justices V S Sirpurkar and Surinder Singh Nijjar in a judgement said.

__._,_.___

Messages in this topic (2)

Recent Activity:

• New Members 12

DISCLAIMER
AURANGABAD_CA is a Yahoo Group for the benefit of CA and other professional. It is especially meant for written discussion within group members and circulate the information among its members. The mail may contain such research/advice/opinion/information/fact provided by any member or moderator and every contain of the mail or information of yahoo is always subject to the Accuracy and of the description of facts.

The Aurangabad_CA , its moderator/owner do not claim that contains in mail/information obtained after reading as a complete and accurate disclosure of relevant fact(s).

Considering all above facts m the transaction based on above mail may not complete without confirming  proper statue/authority/person. Therefore any action/transaction taken on basis of this mail do not imply the accuracy or value . Further this Group's Owner/Moderator/Member  are not liable for any damages or costs suffered due to action/transaction based on information on this Yahoo Group.

For Seeking any Clarification you may mail only to  Group Moderator on
girishkulk@gmail.com