23 Sep 2023 5:30 AM GMT
The Allahabad High Court has held that while awarding major punishment of dismissal from service, surrounding factors along with past record need to be considered by the disciplinary authority.“Gravity of misconduct, past conduct, nature of duties, position in organisation, previous penalty, if any and requirement of discipline to be enforced were relevant to be considered by the...
The Allahabad High Court has held that while awarding major punishment of dismissal from service, surrounding factors along with past record need to be considered by the disciplinary authority.
“Gravity of misconduct, past conduct, nature of duties, position in organisation, previous penalty, if any and requirement of discipline to be enforced were relevant to be considered by the disciplinary authority before the punishment may have been awarded to the respondent,” observed the Court.
The employee was dismissed from service due to absence without leave for about 10 months. The Central Administrative Tribunal set aside the major punishment and remanded the matter to the disciplinary authority. Union of India contended that the same could not have been done as the respondent-employee had absented himself from work continuously without giving any intimation or explanation to the authorities. It was argued that this was a fit case for awarding major punishment of termination.
Per contra, Counsel for the Respondent-employee supported the order of the Tribunal as he had produced medical reports for the period of absence, which were not doubted by the authorities. It was argued that the disciplinary authority failed to consider that his record was otherwise unblemished.
While upholding the order of the Tribunal setting aside the major punishment, bench comprising of Justices Saumitra Dayal Singh and Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal held,
“In the context of absence from duty without leave, all factors should have been examined by the disciplinary authority before award of major punishment of dismissal could be made. To that extent, the Tribunal has further protected the interest of the present petitioner by observing that the disciplinary authority may observe the past record of the respondent and all other factors taken note of by the Tribunal. At present the disciplinary authority had not offered any consideration to the material aspects of the matter.”
Case Title: Union Of India And 3 Others vs. Yashpal
Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 344
Counsel for Petitioner: Gopal VermaCounsel for Respondent: Parashar Pandey
Click Here To Download Order