Supreme Court Rejects Parity in Disciplinary Actions: State of Tamil Nadu vs. M. Mangayarkarasi (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the principle of parity should be the sole basis for determining the quantum of punishment in disciplinary proceedings. CASE TYPE: Service Law (Disciplinary Proceedings) Case Name: State of Tamil Nadu & Anr. vs. M. Mangayarkarasi and etc. […]
Supreme Court modifies punishment of removal to compulsory retirement in CISF case LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the punishment of removal from service for unauthorized absence is disproportionate. CASE TYPE: Service Law. Case Name: Government of India & Ors. vs. V. Shanmugananthan. Judgment Date: 25 October 2018. Introduction Date of the Judgment: 25 October 2018. Citation: Not
Supreme Court Upholds High Court Decision on Disciplinary Inquiry: Union of India vs. Ram Lakhan Sharma (2018) Date of the Judgment: 02 July 2018 Citation: 2018 INSC 605 Judges: Adarsh Kumar Goel, J., Ashok Bhushan, J. (authored the judgment) Can a disciplinary inquiry be deemed fair if the Inquiry Officer also acts as the prosecutor?
Supreme Court Disposes of Appeal in Disciplinary Proceedings Against E K Narayanan (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Disciplinary proceedings and penalties imposed on a government employee. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: E K Narayanan vs. Union of India & Ors. Judgment Date: 16 May 2018 Introduction Date of the Judgment: 16 May 2018 Citation: Not Available
Supreme Court Allows Fresh Voluntary Retirement Application After Disciplinary Proceedings: Dinesh Kumar Gupta vs. State Bank of India (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an employee can apply for voluntary retirement after disciplinary proceedings have concluded. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: Dinesh Kumar Gupta vs. General Manager 1, State Bank of India & Ors. Judgment Date:
Supreme Court Limits Bar Council’s Review Power in Misconduct Case: Advanta India Ltd. vs. B.N. Shivanna (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Scope of review powers of the Disciplinary Committee of the Bar Council of India. CASE TYPE: Professional Misconduct of an Advocate Case Name: M/S. Advanta India Ltd. vs. B.N. Shivanna [Judgment Date]: 21 February 2018 Introduction
LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a second show-cause notice is required before imposing a major penalty on a bank employee after the disciplinary authority has already provided the inquiry report and an opportunity to respond. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: State Bank of India & Ors. vs. B.R. Saini Judgment Date: 15 December 2017 Date of
Can a disciplinary action be overturned simply because the inquiry report was given with the show cause notice instead of before? The Supreme Court of India recently tackled this question in a case involving a transport corporation driver. The core issue was whether the disciplinary proceedings were flawed due to the timing of the inquiry
Date of the Judgment: October 30, 2017 Citation: (2017) INSC 947 Judges: Justice Kurian Joseph and Justice R. Banumathi Can parties settle a disciplinary matter pending before the Supreme Court? The Supreme Court of India addressed this question in a recent case involving a dispute between Bhushan Steel and the State of Uttar Pradesh. The
LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the dismissal of an employee for issuing receipts without receiving payment is justified. CASE TYPE: Service Law/Disciplinary Proceedings Case Name: Mihir Kumar Hazara Choudhury vs. Life Insurance Corpn. & Anr. Judgment Date: 11 September 2017 Date of the Judgment: 11 September 2017 Citation: 2017 INSC 788 Judges: R.K. Agrawal, J., Abhay Manohar
Can a bank initiate disciplinary proceedings against an employee who has applied for voluntary retirement but whose application is still pending? The Supreme Court of India addressed this question in a recent case, clarifying the interplay between voluntary retirement schemes and disciplinary actions. This judgment clarifies that banks can take disciplinary action against employees even
Date of the Judgment: 4 July 2013 Citation: (2013) INSC 451 Judges: Dr. B.S. Chauhan and S.A. Bobde, JJ. Can a disciplinary authority impose punishment by disagreeing with the findings of the Enquiry Officer without giving the delinquent employee a chance to respond? The Supreme Court of India addressed this critical question in a service
