Whether guilty Employee can invoke Article 14 of constitution?

State of Kerala v. A.K. Gopakumar, (2013) 11 SCC 606
Constitution of India
Arts. 309 and 311 - Termination/Discharge - Termination by way of punishment - Employee not offering any explanation
for misconduct - Held, when respondent failed to offer any explanation to his misconduct of undertaking employment in
foreign country without permission of competent authority, his plea of violation of Arts. 309 and 311 not considered,

Constitution of India
Arts. 14 and 16 - Mistake or Illegality - Discrimination - Misconduct - Contention that other erring employees were given
opportunity to rejoin service - Tenability of - Held, there cannot be any equality in assessment of gravity of misconduct
employed by Government for rendering professional service - As respondent committed gross misconduct, it would be
unjust to invoke Art. 14 to nullify decision of his termination, 

Departmental Enquiry
Dismissal of employee without waiting for permission from competent authority - Tenability of - Respondent undertook
employment in foreign country without waiting for permission from competent authority - Despite opportunities given to
him, he declined to rejoin service - Appellant dismissed him from service - Validity of - Held, respondent could have
joined service when disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him, but he declined to rejoin - Under these
circumstances, holding disciplinary enquiry would amount to an empty formality, (2013) 11 SCC 606-C
Constitution of India
Arts. 226 and 136 - Delay - Challenging order of dismissal after delay of two years - High Court dismissed petition -
Justifiability of - Held, as respondent did not offer any explanation for delay of over 2 yrs, High Court justified in
dismissing the petition,

Print Page