Fixing Time Period For Completing Disciplinary Proceedings Causing More Complications, Says Supreme Court

Case: Union of India vs Sharvan Kumar

Coram: Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and Krishna Murari

Case No.: CA 1942 OF 2014

Court Observation: It remains trite that if an Adjudicating Authority in exercise of its jurisdiction could grant or fix a time period to do a particular thing, in the absence of a specific statutory provision to the contrary, the jurisdiction to fix such a time period inhers the jurisdiction to extend the time initially fixed. Such conditional orders have regularly been construed by this Court to be in terrorem so as to put a check on the dilatory tactics by any litigant or to guard against any laxity on the part of the Adjucating Authority but, the Court is not powerless to enlarge the time even though it had peremptorily fixed the period at any earlier stage.

When a conditional order is passed by the Court/Tribunal to do a particular act or thing within a particular period but the order does not provide anything as to the consequence of default, the Court/Tribunal fixing the time for doing a particular thing obviously retains the power to enlarge such time. As a corollary, even the Appellate Court/Tribunal or any higher forum would also be having the power to enlarge such time, if so required. In any case, it cannot be said that the proceedings would come to an end immediately after the expiry of the time fixed.

We are impelled to observe that while treating the proceedings as having abated and as nullity, the High Court has ignored the fundamental principles that fixing of such time period was only a matter of procedure with an expectation of conclusion of the proceedings in an expeditious manner. This period of two months had not acquired any such mandatory statutory character so as to nullify the entire of the disciplinary proceedings with its expiry.

Previous Posts

Copyright Owners Have Right To Dub Cinema: Delhi High Court Vacates Stay On Hindi Dub Of Telugu Movie Bheemla Nayak

Person Driving Without License Has Knowledge That Act Likely To Cause Death: Kerala HC Refuses To Modify Conviction From S.304 To 304A IPC

Central Govt Has Taken Steps To Bring De-Notified Nomadic Tribes Into Mainstream Of The Country: Delhi High Court

Disparity In Pay Scale Classification Based On Mode Of Recruitment, Qualification & Merit Not Unreasonable: Delhi High Court

Courts Can’t Expand Scope Of Qualification Prescribed By Employer By Reading Into It A Higher Qualification: J&K&L High Court

Decision Of Adjudicating Authority Can’t Be Doubted Merely Because It Is Govt Limb, Reliable Evidence Indicating Bias Is Must: Karnataka High Court

State Not Obliged To Pay Salary To Teachers Whose Appointments Are Void Ab Initio: Kerala High Court

Order XVIII Rule 17 CPC Recall Applications Can’t Be Allowed Merely For Filling Lacuna In Cross-Examination: Delhi High Court

Start-Ups Can’t Seek Relaxation Of Tender Conditions As A Matter Of Right, Especially In Field Of Healthcare: Delhi High Court

Dysfunctional Limbs Render 100% Functional Disability: Karnataka High Court Orders ₹21.86 Lakh Compensation For Minor Victim In Motor Accident

Detention Beyond Release Date Violates Article 21: Supreme Court Grants Rs 7.5 Lakh Compensation To Convict Kept In Prison In Excess Of Sentence Period

High Court Under Article 226 And 227 Should Be Extremely Circumspect In Interfering With Orders Passed Under Arbitration Act Download Judgement