The question whether the Central Administrative Tribunal could interfere with penalty awarded by the competent authority on the ground that it is excessive or disproportionate to the misconduct proved, was examined by the Supreme Court of India in which one of the following cases ?
Excel Wear vs. Union of India
Sagir Ahmad vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
L. Chandra Kumar vs. Union of India
Union of India vs. Shri Parma Nanda
Answer is Wrong!
Answer is Right!
This question was previously asked in
UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2022
– The Supreme Court held in this case that the Tribunal has the power to judicially review the findings of the disciplinary authority and the punishment imposed. However, the Tribunal should not sit as an appellate authority substituting its own view on the penalty. It should only interfere with the quantum of punishment if it is shockingly disproportionate to the misconduct proved or if there is some procedural irregularity leading to miscarriage of justice.
– Sagir Ahmad vs. State of Uttar Pradesh concerned the fundamental right to carry on trade or business and the state’s power to create monopolies.
– L. Chandra Kumar vs. Union of India is a landmark judgment where the Supreme Court declared the power of judicial review of the High Courts and the Supreme Court over decisions of Tribunals as part of the basic structure of the Constitution. While it dealt with the jurisdiction of Tribunals, the Parma Nanda case is more specifically about the scope of review of the proportionality of penalty by administrative tribunals.
– The principle laid down in Parma Nanda regarding the proportionality review by tribunals has been reiterated and followed in numerous subsequent judgments.