TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Unjust Inquiries Breaching Rights: Supreme Court Quashes Dismissal Order</h1> <h3>KR. DEB Versus COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, SHILLONG</h3> KR. DEB Versus COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, SHILLONG - 1971 AIR 1447, 1971 SCR 375, 1971 SCC (2) 102 Issues:Improper inquiry process leading to breach of Article 311(2) of the Constitution.Analysis:The appellant, a Sub Inspector of Central Excise, was accused of misappropriating government money. The initial inquiry held by an Examiner of Accounts found the charge not proved due to lack of evidence. However, the Collector appointed a new Inquiry Officer for a supplementary open inquiry, citing the need to examine prosecution witnesses who had not been heard. This new Inquiry Officer also found no conclusive proof of the alleged misappropriation. Despite this, the Collector appointed yet another Inquiry Officer, who ultimately found the appellant guilty of misappropriation based on the same evidence previously deemed insufficient.The appellant argued that successive inquiries without proper justification were not allowed under the Central Civil Services Rules. The Supreme Court analyzed Rule 15 of the Classification and Control Rules, which provides for one inquiry but allows for further evidence if necessary. However, there is no provision for setting aside previous inquiries without valid reasons. The Court concluded that the Collector's actions in appointing multiple Inquiry Officers were not warranted by the rules and amounted to harassment of the appellant.The Court found that the proceedings did not adhere to the principles of natural justice and fairness. It was evident that the Disciplinary Authority was determined to find the appellant guilty, raising suspicions of bias. The Court held that the improper inquiry process constituted a breach of Article 311(2) of the Constitution, which guarantees protection to government employees in disciplinary matters. As a result, the Court allowed the appeal, quashed the dismissal order, and directed the appellant to be reinstated with back pay and allowances. The appellant was also awarded costs for the legal proceedings.In conclusion, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the appellant, highlighting the importance of conducting fair and proper inquiries in disciplinary proceedings involving government employees to uphold constitutional principles and protect their rights.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
