Patna HC: Disciplinary Authority Cannot Impose Major and Minor Penalties in a Single Order  ||  Calcutta HC: Landlord Decides His Residential Needs; Courts Cannot Set Living Standards in Eviction  ||  Orissa HC: Second Marriage During Subsistence of First Remains Invalid Even After First Wife's Death  ||  Karnataka HC: Appeals Against Acquittal in Bailable Offences Lie Only Before High Court  ||  Supreme Court: Stamp Duty on an Agreement to Sell is Leviable Only if Possession is Transferred  ||  SC: Motive Becomes Irrelevant When Direct Evidence Such as a Dying Declaration is Available  ||  Supreme Court Issues Directions to CoC in Builder Insolvency Cases To Protect Homebuyers’ Interests  ||  MP High Court: Women Retain Reservation Benefits After Marriage if Caste is Recognized in Both States  ||  Allahabad HC: Police Must Prosecute Informants of False Firs, and IOs May Face Contempt if They Fail  ||  MP HP: Over-Age Candidate Cannot Claim Age Relaxation Due to Delay in Earlier Recruitment    

Shashi Kumar Singh Vs. The State of Bihar and Ors. - (High Court of Patna) (21 Aug 2020)

Where delinquent chooses not to participate in proceedings in spite of opportunity being granted, he is estopped from raising the plea of non-compliance of the principles of natural justice

MANU/BH/0406/2020

Service

The Petitioner has assailed the order whereby the District & Sessions Judge, has dismissed the Petitioner from service with effect from 1st June, 2002. The Petitioner has sought a direction for payment of arrears of salary which he alleges to be due since 1st July, 2000. He has also prayed for reinstatement in service. It is submitted by the Petitioner's counsel that, the proceedings were conducted in gross violation of the principles of natural justice.

The Petitioner has been absent without leave. The Petitioner has not complied with the order, transferring him from Deoghar to Madhubani Judgeship for a very long period. Though he was relieved from Deoghar on 28th April, 1998, he has not joined at the transferred place until 30th June, 2000, i.e., a period of more than two years. That apart, the Petitioner has chosen not to appear in the proceedings in spite of various adjournments granted to facilitate his appearance before the Enquiry Officer. Even thereafter, he has never appeared before the Disciplinary Authority.

Since the Petitioner has himself chosen not to participate in the proceedings, there is a deemed waiver with the principles of natural justice by the petitioner. The Apex Court in the case of Board of Director, Himachal Pradesh Transport Corporation & Another-Versus-K C Rahi, has clearly held that, where the delinquent chooses not to participate in the proceedings in spite of opportunity granted, he is estopped from raising the plea of non-compliance of the principles of natural justice. The Apex Court has held that in such circumstances, the principles of natural justice cannot be applied as a straight jacket formula.

The order of the Disciplinary Authority dismissing the Petitioner from service is an elaborate and detailed order taking into consideration the Petitioner's assertions and response to the charges sent by post. The Petitioner himself, on the other hand, chose not to appear at any stage of the proceedings.

Present Court exercising judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, referring to the decision in the case of Union of India & Others-Versus-P Gunasekaran, would confine judicial review to the decision making process. Present Court is not inclined to look into the order of the Disciplinary Authority, as if it is sitting in appeal over the same. From the facts available on record, it appears that, the Petitioner has refused to comply with the transfer order for a long period. No case is, therefore, made out for setting aside the order of punishment awarded to the Petitioner. Writ petition is dismissed.

Relevant : Board of Director, Himachal Pradesh Transport Corporation & Another-Versus-K C Rahi, MANU/SC/1138/2008, Union of India & Others-Versus-P Gunasekaran, MANU/SC/1068/2014

Tags : PUNISHMENT   DISMISSAL   LEGALITY  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved