Supreme Court Holds Departmental Enquiry Without Witness Examination Violates Natural Justice; Dismissal Set Aside
Case Name: Jai Prakash Saini v. Managing Director, U.P. Cooperative Federation Ltd. and Others
Citation: 2026 INSC 305
Date of Judgment/Order: 01 April 2026
Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol; Hon’ble Mr. Justice Manoj Misra
Held: The Supreme Court held that a departmental enquiry stands vitiated where no oral enquiry is conducted and no witness is examined to prove charges, despite denial by the employee, as such procedure violates mandatory service rules and principles of natural justice.
Summary: The case arose from disciplinary proceedings against the appellant, who was dismissed from service and subjected to recovery on allegations of embezzlement and shortage of paddy. The appellant challenged the dismissal on the ground that no oral enquiry was conducted and no witnesses were examined to prove the charges. The employer contended that the appellant’s replies were evasive and amounted to admission, thereby dispensing with the need for evidence. The Supreme Court rejected this contention, holding that there was no categorical admission of guilt and that departmental proceedings are distinct from civil pleadings where evasive replies may be treated as admission. The Court analysed the applicable service rules and reiterated settled law that when charges are denied, the employer must lead evidence, examine witnesses, and provide opportunity for cross-examination. It further held that even in cases based on documentary evidence, documents must be proved through witnesses unless admitted. The Court relied on earlier precedents including Sur Enamel, Kharak Singh, and Chamoli District Cooperative Bank to reaffirm that absence of oral enquiry renders the proceedings invalid.
Decision: The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court judgment and the dismissal order along with recovery, and granted liberty to the employer to conduct a de novo enquiry within six months; it further directed reinstatement with consequential benefits if no fresh enquiry is conducted, or suspension with allowance if enquiry is initiated, and disposed of the matter without costs.