Subscribe

Areas of law

Service & Employment

3 judgments

Telangana High Court ·15 Sep 2026 ·Service Law

Telangana HC: Removal of an insurance officer later honourably acquitted is excessive; reduced to compulsory retirement

The question: Is the penalty of removal from service proportionate where the officer was honourably acquitted in a criminal trial on substantially the same charges?

An officer of National Insurance Company Limited was dismissed in 2002 after a departmental inquiry into medical-claim settlements, and the appellate authority upheld the penalty in 2016. He was later tried on substantially the same allegations in a corruption case and honourably acquitted. The High Court held that removal from service, after about 24 years of service, was unduly harsh and disproportionate.

Allowed WP/46784/2016
Supreme Court ·11 Aug 2026 ·Service Law

Supreme Court: Employee cannot be sacked for 'suppressing' a criminal case he did not know of; two-step enquiry needed

The question: Can an employee be terminated for suppressing criminal antecedents he was not aware of?

An employee of the Fertilizers and Chemicals Travancore Ltd. was terminated for giving false information about his criminal antecedents, after a non-cognizable police report under Sections 323 and 504 IPC turned up against him. The Supreme Court held that he genuinely did not know about the report, and that the employer had not properly considered whether the matter justified dismissal.

Appeal(s) allowed 2026 INSC 829
Supreme Court ·13 Jul 2026 ·Disability Rights

Supreme Court awards Rs 1.25 crore to a CRPF constable who lost his vision, as the Union found him no alternate post

The question: Does Section 47 of the PwD Act, 1995 protect a serving force member who acquires a disability, despite a 2002 exemption notification for combatant personnel of paramilitary forces?

A CRPF constable (driver) was medically invalidated out of service after losing sight in one eye and suffering impaired vision in the other, and was given only Rs 15,000. The Single Judge ordered his reinstatement under Section 47 of the Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995, and the Division Bench upheld it. The Supreme Court dismissed the Union's appeal but, since the respondent is now in his sixties, replaced reinstatement with a payment of Rs 1.25 crore.

Dismissed 2026 INSC 689