Mumbai. The Bombay excessive court docket (HC) on Tuesday mentioned that there isn’t any bar on utilizing “dependable and acceptable” rumour as proof in departmental proceedings towards erring workers whereas upholding the dismissal of a professor and a library clerk of a Dombivli-based faculty.
The professor and the clerk had moved the HC after the College and Faculty Tribunal at Mumbai, on January 27, 2016, upheld their dismissal from service in July 2013. They have been sacked after the inquiry officer discovered them responsible of insubordination, dereliction of responsibility, and many others.
The petitioners contended that they have been victimised for in search of redressal of grievances of their colleagues, which irked the administration and their dismissal was an act of vengeance by the faculty authorities.
That they had additionally challenged the departmental motion towards them and the order of College and Faculty Tribunal on varied grounds.
Justice CV Bhadang, nonetheless, discovered no substance within the petitioners’ problem. He mentioned that there was no severe problem to the findings of truth recorded by the inquiry officer.
The choose additionally rejected the petitioners’ arguments report ready by a non-public detective, employed by the husband of the library clerk, couldn’t have been used as proof towards the 2 within the division continuing.
In addition to the report was nothing however rumour, because the non-public detective, who wrote the report, was not examined as a witness towards them, the choose mentioned.
Justice Bhadang mentioned that strict guidelines of proof don’t apply to a departmental inquiry and there’s no bar even on performing on rumour proof in a given case, whether it is discovered to be dependable and acceptable.