Supreme Court bars Letters Patent Bench from interfering with Single Bench decisions

The Supreme Court addresses the extent of the High Court's jurisdiction under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent to review such decisions.

Who it concerns: Appellant: R. Saravanan (Deputy Registrar); Respondents: Periyar University (represented by its Registrar) and others; Bench: Justice Chandrashekar.

What the court decided

• The Court held that the One-man Commission conducted the domestic inquiry proceedings in accordance with statutory Rules.
• The Court held that the appellant had a clear understanding of the disciplinary proceedings and was afforded a full opportunity to defend himself.
• The Court held that the challenge to the formation of the One-man Commission must fail.
• The Court noted that the appellant's earlier writ petition challenging the Commission's constitution was dismissed and not appealed.
• The Court stated that the question raised by the appellant regarding the validity of the domestic inquiry proceedings is untenable.

Also in the document

• The judgment is marked as 'REPORTABLE'.
• The Court distinguished between substantive violations and technical infringements of natural justice, noting that minor procedural violations do not vitiate an inquiry if no prejudice is caused.
• The Court referenced specific charges (Nos. 1, 4, and 10) that formed the basis for the removal from service.