Article 226 – High Court Not Required To Reappreciate Evidence Or Interfere With Findings Recorded By Disciplinary Authority

Case: Umesh Kumar Pahwa vs Board of Directors Uttarakhand Gramin Bank

Coram: Justices MR Shah and BV Nagarathna

Case No.: CA 796-­799 OF 2022

Court Observation: “We are of the opinion that the punishment of removal for the charges proved and the misconduct established, is too harsh and disproportionate. However, considering the fact that it can be said to be a case of loss of confidence in the employee by the Bank, we deem it just and proper to substitute the punishment from that of removal of service to that of compulsory retirement.”

“So far as the submission on behalf of the appellant that the appellant has not conducted any misconduct and the finding recorded by the inquiry officer on the charges proved are perverse is concerned, the High Court is justified in holding that in the limited jurisdiction available to the High Court in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the High Court is not required to reappreciate the evidence and/or interfere with the findings recorded by the inquiry officer accepted by the disciplinary authority.”

Previous Posts

Section 482 CrPC – There Has To Be Some Factual Supporting Material For FIR Allegations: Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Proceedings

Affidavits Not Mere Sheets of Paper but Solemn Statements on Oath: Supreme Court Upholds Cancellation of NOIDA Plot Allotment

Intelligible Differentia: Supreme Court Upholds State Policy To Deny Bonus Marks To NRHM/NHM Employees In Other States

Land Acquisition Act 1894 – Injurious Affection To Property May Stand On A Different Footing From Injurious Affection To Earnings: Supreme Court

Transfer Order Unsustainable If It Is Based On Irrelevant Ground & Not On Any Germane Factor: Supreme Court

Penetrative Sexual Act Between The Thighs Of Victim Held Together Is Rape As Defined U/S 375 IPC: Kerala High Court Download Judgement