Breaking Supreme Court Legal Update
New Delhi · Friday, 31 July 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law — free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2024-11-18 allowed

SATYENDRA SINGH vs STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR

Bench: 2 — Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, Sandeep Mehta

In Brief

An Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Tax in Uttar Pradesh was punished with censure and stoppage of increments following a disciplinary inquiry. No witnesses were examined to prove the charges, though the appellant denied them. The Tribunal quashed the punishment as the inquiry violated mandatory procedural rules requiring witness examination for major penalties. The High Court reversed this. The Supreme Court held that recording oral evidence is mandatory when major penalties are imposed. Since no witness was examined despite charges carrying major punishment, the entire inquiry was void. The Court restored the Tribunal's order, quashing the penalty and directing payment of consequential benefits with 6% interest if delayed.

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.

Administrative Law Civil Procedure Government Servants Disciplinary Action Natural Justice Constitutional Law

Read the full judgment & headnote. It's free.

Register to read the complete Supreme Court judgment text and the headnote, and to search 1 lakh+ Supreme Court judgments by meaning. It is a free service.

Register Free Login