9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Violation of principles of natural justice in dismissal of respondent. 2. Conduct of enquiry and opportunity for inspection of documents. 3. Setting aside of the order of dismissal and holding of a fresh enquiry. Detailed Analysis: 1. The respondent, a principal of the appellant's institution, was dismissed for misappropriating funds without being provided with an opportunity to inspect the documents mentioned in the charge sheet. The respondent was not given a chance to explain or participate in the enquiry, leading to his dismissal. The respondent challenged the dismissal in the High Court, which set aside the order and suggested a fresh enquiry if necessary. 2. The appellant contended that there was no violation of natural justice as the respondent did not cooperate in the enquiry and did not request to examine any witnesses. However, the Supreme Court held that the respondent had the right to inspect documents relied upon by the management and should have been given the opportunity to do so. The Court emphasized the importance of providing the delinquent with copies of relevant documents or allowing inspection to ensure a fair enquiry process. 3. The Supreme Court agreed with the High Court's decision to set aside the dismissal order due to procedural irregularities in the conduct of the enquiry. It directed the appellant to conduct a fresh enquiry, provide the respondent with an opportunity to inspect the documents, and ensure compliance with principles of natural justice. The Court also highlighted the importance of completing the enquiry within six months and granting the respondent his pensionary benefits based on the outcome of the fresh enquiry.
|
