VIGILANCE MANUAL VOLUME III - AP Online

DECISION - 414
805
circumstances, the High Court was not right in staying the
proceedings.
(414)
(A) Trap — hostile evidence of 17 witnesses
(B) Evidence — of 17 hostile witnesses
Not a case of no evidence, where charge held
proved on the sole testimony of complainant even
though 17 witnesses turned hostile.
(C) Evidence — standard of proof
Standard of proof is preponderance of probability
in disciplinary proceedings.
(D) Evidence Act — applicability of
Evidence Act has no application to disciplinary
proceedings.
(E) Penalty — quantum of
What should be the penalty to be imposed, is for
the disciplinary authority to consider.
(F) Public Service Commission
View of Public Service Commission, only
recommendatory, not binding on Government.
N. Rajarathinam vs. State of Tamil Nadu,
1996(6) SLR SC 696
The petitioner, Assistant Commercial Tax Officer, was
dismissed from service on 6-1-89. The Administrative Tribunal set
aside the order. The Supreme Court remitted the matter to the
Tribunal holding that administrative member alone cannot decide.
The Tribunal upheld the order of dismissal and the matter came up
before the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court found no force in the contention that as
as many as 17 witnesses examined by the Government to prove the