TMI Blog2009 (2) TMI 916X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of a complaint received, alleging that the real date of birth of respondent was 2.4.1945, the appellant by letter dated 26.8.1994, called upon the respondent to produce his school certificate. It also secured a school leaving certificate from the school where the respondent had studied, on 23.1.1995, which showed his date of birth as 2.4.1945. Respondent was prosecuted by the State for offences punishable under Sections 420, 468 and 471 IPC in Cr. Case No. 109-II/1998 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kangra at Dharamshala. The prosecution case was that though the appellant's date of birth was 02.4.1945, and his school records showed that date of birth, he had given a false affidavit claiming to be an illiterate born on 11. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 06 holding that the respondent's date of birth could not have been changed to his disadvantage, without enquiry, and therefore, he ought to have been continued in service till 31.1.2006 with reference to the date of birth earlier entered. The Tribunal held that the respondent was entitled to salary and other service benefits for the period 31.5.2003 to 31.1.2006. That order was confirmed by the High Court by dismissing appellant's writ petition. The said order is challenged in this appeal. 6. The Tribunal and the High Court have proceeded on the assumption that the appellant changed the recorded date of birth of the respondent from 11.1.1948 as 02.5.1945 solely on the basis of a conviction by the criminal court in regard to false ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct which is denied, or when any term or condition of employment are proposed to be altered to the employee's disadvantage without his consent. On the other hand, if there is an admission of misconduct, or if the employee pleads guilty in respect of the charge, or if the employee consents to the alteration of any terms and condition of service, or where the employee himself seeks the alteration in the conditions of service, there is no need for holding an enquiry or for giving an opportunity to the employee to be heard or show cause. Holding an employee guilty of a misconduct on admission, or altering the conditions of service with consent, without enquiry or opportunity to show cause, does not violate principles of natural justice. 7 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
