NDLI: Ram Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	Service law
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Act(s) Referred	Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872)
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Allowed
Headnote	Issue for consideration: Whether the dismissal of the appellant-constable from service pursuant to the departmental enquiry was justified; and what is the effect of the acquittal, ordered by the appellate judge in the criminal trial, on the order of dismissal passed in the departmental enquiry. Service law – Dismissal from service pursuant to the departmental enquiry on allegation of commission of fraud – Justification – Effect of acquittal ordered by the appellate judge in the criminal trial, on the order of dismissal – Allegation against the appellant-constable of altering his date of birth in his 8th standard marksheet to project himself as having attained majority at the time of recruitment to the post – Initiation of departmental proceeding – Dismissal from service – Conviction and sentence of the appellant u/s. 420 IPC by the trial court, however, acquittal by the appellate court – Writ petition seeking quashing of the dismissal order and re-instatement in service – Dismissed by the High Court – Correctness:Held: Inference drawn about the proof of the charges by ignoring the relevant and material evidence being the deposition of the prosecution witness, the marksheet of 8th class of the appellant enclosed in the chargesheet and the original marksheet which have direct bearing on the charge – Disciplinary Authority and the appellate authority merely reiterated the reasoning in the enquiry report – Explanation given by the appellant that overwriting in the application form was only due to correction of an inadvertent error is accepted – As long as the original 8th standard marksheet reflected his date of birth as 21.04.1972 and there is no correction or manipulation in that document, the appellant cannot be penalised – Furthermore, reading of the entire judgment clearly indicates that the appellant was acquitted after full consideration of the prosecution evidence and after noticing that the prosecution miserably failed to prove the charge – Findings of the appellate judge in the criminal case clearly indicate that the charge against the appellant was not just, “not proved”, in fact the charge even stood “disproved” by the very prosecution evidence – Charges were not just similar but identical and the evidence, witnesses and circumstances were all the same – Thus, the order of termination, the order of the appellate authority, the orders refusing to reconsider and review the penalty, being illegal and untenable, are quashed – Judgment of the High Court is set aside – Issuance of direction to re-instate the appellant with all consequential benefits including 50% of the backwages.Judicial review – Order of the Disciplinary Authority – Power of writ court to review: Held: Is very limited – Scope of enquiry is only to examine whether the decision-making process is legitimate – Courts are entitled to consider whether the findings of the Disciplinary Authority have ignored material evidence and if so the courts can interfere – Mere acquittal by a criminal court would not confer on the employee a right to claim any benefit, including reinstatement – However, if the charges in the departmental enquiry and the criminal court are identical or similar, and if the evidence, witnesses and circumstances are one and the same, then the matter acquires a different dimension – Court would be entitled to exercise its discretion and grant relief, if it concludes that allowing the findings in the disciplinary proceedings to stand would be unjust, unfair and oppressive. [Para 11-13] Words and phrases – Expressions “benefit of doubt” and “honorably acquitted”, used in judgments – Effect:Held: Said expressions are not to be understood as magic incantations – Court of law will not be carried away by the mere use of such terminology – Court in judicial review is obliged to examine the substance of the judgment and not go by the form of expression used. [Para 25] Evidence Act, 1872 – Fact, when said to be ‘disproved’:Held: A fact is said to be “disproved” when, after considering the matters before it, the court either believes that it does not exist or considers its non-existence so probable that a prudent man ought, under the circumstances of the particular case, to act upon the supposition that it does not exist – Fact is said to be “not proved” when it is neither “proved” nor “disproved”. [Para 26]
Judge	Hon'ble Mr. Justice J.K. Maheshwari Hon'ble Mr. Justice K.V. Viswanathan
Neutral Citation	2023 INSC 1047
Petitioner	Ram Lal
Respondent	State Of Rajasthan & Ors.
SCR	[2023] 15 S.C.R. 808
Judgement Date	2023-12-04
Case Number	7935

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Ram Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.

Please Log-in to view this content

State of Rajasthan & Ors . Vs. Shankar Lal Parmar

Dr. Ami Lal Bhat Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Rajasthan State Road Transport Corp. & Ors. Vs. Babu Lal Jangir

State of Rajasthan & Anr. Vs. Mangat Lal Sidana

State Bank of India Vs. Ram Lal Bhaskar & Anr

Guman Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.

Net Ram Yadav Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Ors.

Rajasthan Public Service Commission Vs. Chandan Ram and Anr.

Rajasthan State Tpt Corpn. & Anr. Vs. Bajrang Lal

Ram Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.

Ram Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

State of Rajasthan & Ors . Vs. Shankar Lal Parmar

Dr. Ami Lal Bhat Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Rajasthan State Road Transport Corp. & Ors. Vs. Babu Lal Jangir

State of Rajasthan & Anr. Vs. Mangat Lal Sidana

State Bank of India Vs. Ram Lal Bhaskar & Anr

Guman Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.

Net Ram Yadav Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Ors.

Rajasthan Public Service Commission Vs. Chandan Ram and Anr.

Rajasthan State Tpt Corpn. & Anr. Vs. Bajrang Lal

Ram Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.