1. Haryana Civil Services (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1887 Rule 7 - In matter matters of taking disciplinary action against a delinquent employee, the employer is not only required to make the employee aware of the specific imputations of misconduct but also disclose the material sought to be used against him and give him a reasonable opportunity of explaining his position or defending himself - If, the employer uses some material adverse to the employee about which the latter is not given notice, a final decision gets vitiated on the ground of violation of Rule of audi alteram partem. (174) P.L.R.  
  2. Haryana Civil Services (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1987 - Driver cannot be held responsible for non-insurance of a vehicle or non-obtaining of its fitness certificate, which is the responsibility of the owner or of the person to whom it is stated to have been entrusted - XEN (the owner of the vehicle) not having been charge-sheeted at all on this count and the charges against the next officer, i.e. the Sub-Divisional Officer having been dropped by the Government, and the Junior-Engineer having been held not to be liable on account of discrimination - Petitioner the driver who is at the lowest rung of the hierarchy, cannot be foisted with responsibility for non-insurance of the vehicle - Recovery ordered to be made from the petitioner as per the said order is held to be illegal - Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (59 of 1988) S. 166. (179) P.L.R.  
  3. Haryana Civil Services (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1987 - Once the amounts have been reimbursed to the petitioner, spent from her own pocket towards the security of Anganwari Workers and certain amounts spent for purchase of office stationery etc. then those amounts have been sanctioned by the CDPO and have been paid to the petitioner there is no intention to embezzle money - In view of this, the punishment of stoppage of one increment without cumulative effect does not appear justifiable and that too on such a trivial matter duly explained. (174) P.L.R.  
  4. Haryana Civil Services (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1987 Rule 7 - A major penalty of dismissal could not have been imposed upon the petitioner without holding a regular departmental inquiry more so in view of the fact that in response to the charge memo issued upon him under Rule 7 i.e. with regard to imposition of a major penalty, the petitioner had specifically denied one charge and only admitted part of the other two charges. (174) P.L.R.  
  5. Haryana Civil Services Punishment and Appeal Rules, 1987, Rule 7 - Charge sheet was under rule 7 of the Rules - However, the major punishment of has been imposed upon the appellant by imposing a penalties without holding regular enquiry - Appeal  - Cannot give a direction to the appellant to conduct a fresh inquiry.  (179) P.L.R.  


Register SCeJ  Free Updates*

Supreme Court e@journal

Subscribe or take a 4 week FREE trial 

Note: Please fill out the fields marked with an asterisk.