The petitioner has been punished without even giving an opportunity. This Court is of an opinion that the writ petition is fit for remand and accordingly, the impugned order passed by the respondent is quashed.
Demand of GST – The petitioner, working as a Salesman in the TASMAC shop belonging to the respondents, challenged the impugned proceedings of the second respondent dated 26.12.2019. The petitioner has been asked to pay the fine and 18% GST within a period of 7 days. The petitioner submitted that order to pay the penalty along with GST has been passed without giving an opportunity. The respondent counsel submitted that the petitioner was indulging in selling the liquor bottle by adding an extra cost to the MRP and thereby the petitioner was misappropriating and enriching himself at the cost of TASMAC. The respondent was not satisfied with the explanation given by the petitioner, and therefore he was suspended from services. The court observed that any order affecting the rights of an employee must be issued at least by providing an opportunity to the delinquent official to defend his case in the manner known to law. Further, it is dear that no such show-cause notice was issued to the writ petitioner. The Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents is also unable to establish that an opportunity was provided to the writ petitioner before issuing the impugned order imposing penalty.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court allowed the petition and quashed the proceedings of the second respondent dated 26-12-2019. Further, directed the respondent to issue a fresh SCN setting out all the details and directed the petitioner to submit his explanation/objection. The second respondent is directed to proceed strictly in accordance with law by affording an opportunity to the petitioner.
The petitioner has been punished without even giving an opportunity. This Court is of an opinion that the writ petition is fit for remand and accordingly, the impugned order passed by the respondent is quashed.
Demand of GST – The petitioner, working as a Salesman in the TASMAC shop belonging to the respondents, challenged the impugned proceedings of the second respondent dated 26.12.2019. The petitioner has been asked to pay the fine and 18% GST within a period of 7 days. The petitioner submitted that order to pay the penalty along with GST has been passed without giving an opportunity. The respondent counsel submitted that the petitioner was indulging in selling the liquor bottle by adding an extra cost to the MRP and thereby the petitioner was misappropriating and enriching himself at the cost of TASMAC. The respondent was not satisfied with the explanation given by the petitioner, and therefore he was suspended from services. The court observed that any order affecting the rights of an employee must be issued at least by providing an opportunity to the delinquent official to defend his case in the manner known to law. Further, it is dear that no such show-cause notice was issued to the writ petitioner. The Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents is also unable to establish that an opportunity was provided to the writ petitioner before issuing the impugned order imposing penalty.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court allowed the petition and quashed the proceedings of the second respondent dated 26-12-2019. Further, directed the respondent to issue a fresh SCN setting out all the details and directed the petitioner to submit his explanation/objection. The second respondent is directed to proceed strictly in accordance with law by affording an opportunity to the petitioner.