LCI Learning
LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Corrigendum Charge-sheet correcting typographical error can be issued even during stay

Raj Kumar Makkad ,
  10 January 2011       Share Bookmark

Court :
Supreme Court of India
Brief :
Service - Misconduct - Rule 3 of the ASI (Conduct) Rules, 1968; Article 136 of the Constitution of India, 1950 - High Court quashed charge memorandum and corrigendum thereto issued by Appellant - Hence these Appeals - Whether High Court was justified in quashing charge memorandum and corrigendum thereto and in making adverse remarks against officers of State Government in regard to issuance of corrigendum
Citation :
State of Orissa and Anr. v. Sangram Keshari Misra and Anr. (Decided on 19.10.2010) MANU/SC/0860/2010

Held, logic of reasoning of High Court was that if corrigendum dated, 22nd June, 2002 had to be ignored as it was issued in violation of interim Order of stay dated, 12th June, 2002, the charge dated, 29th April, 2002 would be false and incorrect as admittedly first Respondent did not receive copy of Order in "Misc. case No. 238/2001", as there was no proceedings with the number "Misc. case No. 238/2001" . The Corrigendum reserved liberty to Government to take action in accordance with law . The Corrigendum was issued under bona fide impression that correction of typographical error in charge memorandum could be issued when there was order of interim stay, and, therefore, there was no intention to violate interim stay. High Court was justified in closing contempt proceedings but it was not justified in expressing disapproval and issuing warning to senior officers of State Government . Civil Appeal No. 8509/2003 dismissed - Civil Appeal No. 8510/2003 allowed in part by deleting adverse remarks against senior officers of State.

 
"Loved reading this piece by Raj Kumar Makkad?
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"



Published in Labour & Service Law
Views : 6482




Comments