Category: Service

Service Matters

Disciplinary Proceedings — Charges — Proof — Constable found 12 kms from camp when permitted to visit hospital — Detained by civilians due to unwarranted activities affecting reputation of Force — Charge of leaving camp without permission not proved, but being found at distant residential colony instead of hospital and subsequent detention sufficiently proved conduct unbecoming of member of Armed Forces.

2025 INSC 1055 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH CONST. AMAR SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHER ( Before : Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Atul S. Chandurkar, JJ. )…

Service Matters

Police Service — Discipline — Unauthorized Absence — Dismissal justified — Unauthorized absence from duty, especially in a disciplined force, constitutes gross indiscipline. When a member of a disciplined force remains absent without permission or intimation for a considerable period, dismissal from service is justified, provided due procedure is followed.

2025 INSC 1056 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Vs. EX. C. SATPAL SINGH ( Before : J.K. Maheshwari and Vijay Bishnoi, JJ. ) Civil…

Service Matters

Service Law — Employee’s Plea for Mercy — An employee’s statement pleading innocence and seeking forgiveness for any mistake indirectly admits guilt and warrants mercy. Evidence in Departmental Inquiry — Findings in a departmental inquiry are based on preponderance of probabilities, not strict proof beyond reasonable doubt, and the High Court’s view that findings were based on conjecture and surmises was legally unsustainable if evidence supported the findings

2025 INSC 1010 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH STATE BANK OF INDIA AND OTHERS Vs. RAMADHAR SAO ( Before : Rajesh Bindal and Manmohan, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No.…

Service Matters

Interpretation of Statute and Notifications — ‘Any’ University does not mean only within the State — The phrase “in any State-aided University or College” in a notification extending retirement age was interpreted to include experience from universities or colleges outside the State of West Bengal. The court found that confining the benefit to experience within West Bengal had no rational nexus or object, making it artificial, discriminatory, and violative of equality principles.

2025 INSC 910 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SUBHA PRASAD NANDI MAJUMDAR Vs. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL SERVICE AND OTHERS ( Before : Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Manoj…

Service Matters

Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965, Rule 13(2) and Rule 14, Appendix 3 — Disciplinary proceedings for major penalties — Initiation of by authority competent to impose minor penalties — Permissible — Rule 13(2) allows a disciplinary authority competent to impose minor penalties to institute proceedings for major penalties, even if not competent to impose major penalties itself. – Charge Sheet — Validity of issuance by General Manager (Telecommunications) for major penalties — Held valid as the General Manager is competent to impose minor penalties and Rule 13(2) permits initiation of proceedings for major penalties by such an authority.

2025 INSC 898 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS Vs. R. SHANKARAPPA ( Before : Sanjay Kumar and Satish Chandra Sharma, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

Service Matters

Pension Law — Family Pension — Eligibility of ‘Substitutes’ in Railways — deceased husband of the appellant was appointed as a ‘Substitute Waterman’ and died in harness after serving for 9 years, 8 months, and 26 days — Railways denied family pension on the grounds that his service was not regularized and did not meet the 10-year qualifying period for family pension — Appellant contended that as per Indian Railway Establishment Manual Vol-I, Rule 1515 and Railway Service (Pension) Rules, 1993, especially Rule 75(2)(a), substitutes with continuous service of one year are entitled to family pension. Held, deceased had acquired temporary status and completed more than one year of continuous service, thus eligible for family pension.

2025 INSC 855 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MALA DEVI Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Satish Chandra Sharma, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

You missed