A RAMALINGAM Vs. DISTRICT FOREST OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In Stanzen Toyotetsu India Private Limited v. Girish V. And Other, (2014) 3 SCC 636. It was held that suffice it to say that while there is no legal bar to the holding of the disciplinary proceedings and the criminal trial simultaneously, stay of disciplinary proceedings may be advisable course in cases where the criminal charge against the employee is grave and continuance of the disciplinary proceedings is likely to plagiarize their defence before the criminal court.

(2.) The Supreme Court in State of Rajasthan v. B.K.Meena and Others, (1996) 6 SCC 417 held that -

(3.) It is also to note that acquittal in criminal proceedings on the same set of charges, per se, does not entitle the delinquent to claim immunity from disciplinary proceedings, as observed by the Supreme Court in the case of C.M.D.U.C.O. vs. P.C.Kakkar, (2003) AIR SC 1571. In the same way, departmental proceedings may be continued even after retirement of the employee. (U.P.S.S.Corp.Ltd. vs. K.S.Tandon, (2008) AIR SC 1235)