HC sets 6-month timeframe for disciplinary action against errant state govt employees

HC sets 6-month timeframe for disciplinary action against errant state govt employees

K.Kaushik@timesofindia.com 03.10,2026

Madurai: Reminding Tamil Nadu govt of its stated ‘zero tolerance’ towards corruption, Madras high court has ordered that disciplinary proceedings initiated against errant govt employees should be completed within six months. “If govt servants who are violating the conduct rules and engaging in corrupt practices are dealt with in a prompt manner, then it would send a strong message against corruption and discourage other officers from committing such acts,” said Justice B Pugalendhi. Directing the govt to amend the Tamil Nadu Civil Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules and relevant conduct rules by incorporating GOs and court rulings that permit simultaneous conduct of disciplinary and criminal proceedings against delinquent govt servants, the judge said: 

“By keeping the disciplinary proceedings in abeyance merely because the criminal case is pending, and thereby permitting such delinquent officers to continue in service and receive benefits, the very purpose of the conduct rules would be defeated. Such an approach would have the effect of enabling delinquent officers to avoid or delay the consequences of their misconduct.” The judge said, “When the entry of a person with criminal antecedents into govt service is considered to have a bearing on the purity of administration, the involvement of a serving govt servant in a criminal case cannot be viewed with any lesser seriousness. The continued presence of such a person in service, without timely departmental action, has a direct bearing on the purity, functioning and reputation of the administration.” 

He added, “The court is unable to understand as to how the disciplinary authority can take a call on whether the disciplinary proceedings can be kept in abeyance, when the decisions of the Supreme Court have consistently made it clear that there is no legal bar for simultaneous disciplinary proceedings during the pendency of criminal cases.” The court was hearing a batch of petitions filed by govt servants against whom criminal cases were filed under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, based on traps conducted by DVAC. On being placed under suspension, they filed petitions challenging their suspension orders saying they were under suspension for a prolonged period and that disciplinary inquiry has not been conducted against them.

Mere delay can’t be reason to end disciplinary proceeding: HC

Mere delay can’t be reason to end disciplinary proceeding: HC 

18.09.2026

Chennai: A mere delay in conducting disciplinary proceedings against an employee will not automatically become fatal to the entire proceedings, Madras high court said, adding, “Courts must examine the reasons for the delay and the circumstances in which the alleged misconduct was discovered.” 

A division bench of Justice S M Subramaniam and Justice Krishnaswamy Govindarajan further emphasised that the natural-justice inquiry focuses on whether the delinquent employee received a fair opportunity to defend himself, rather than mechanically determining whether a particular number of notices were issued. 

The court made the observations while upholding the termination of S Sukumar, an employee of Dharapuram Public Servants’ Co-operative Thrift and Credit Society, over allegations of misappropriating society funds. According to Sukumar, the alleged incident occurred in 1995-97, but the charge memorandum was issued in 2011. Due to the long delay in framing charges, a single judge of the court quashed the termination order. 

Aggrieved, the management of the society moved the present plea. Allowing the appeal, the court pointed out that the delay in issuing the charge memo was due to an interim order passed by a single judge of the court. Therefore, the delay cannot be attributed to the management of the society for initiation of departmental disciplinary proceedings, the court said. 

“Mere delays per se would not be sufficient to quash the entire charge memorandum in all cases. Each case has to be decided by considering the facts, nature of the allegations, mitigating circumstances, and the cause for the delay in initiating the departmental disciplinary proceedings,” the court said. As to the allegation of violation of natural justice, the court said, “It is not about issuance of show cause notices, but whether a fair opportunity was afforded to the delinquent officer. The test to be applied is whether the principles of natural justice has been complied with by affording a fair opportunity to the delinquent officer.

'Nothing short of fraud': SC pulls up Indian Nursing Council rule allowing nursing colleges 30km away from ICU hospitals

'Nothing short of fraud': SC pulls up Indian Nursing Council rule allowing nursing colleges 30km away from ICU hospitals 

Written By : Barsha Misra

Published On 21 May 2026 5:47 PM | Updated On 21 May 2026 5:47 PM Supreme Court of India

New Delhi: Expressing shock over a reported Indian Nursing Council (INC) norm allowing nursing colleges to be located up to 30 kilometres away from hospitals having Intensive Care Unit (ICU) facilities, the Supreme Court recently questioned how nursing students could be expected to receive meaningful hands-on training under such an arrangement.

Taking note of the fact that the nursing curriculum requires students to undertake daily ICU visits as part of the practical training, the Apex Court bench comprising Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Justice R. Mahadevan found it shocking that nursing institutes could get permission to operate despite being located so far away from hospitals equipped with functioning ICUs.

Expressing its shock, the top court bench noted that nursing students must work on real patients as part of their training and cannot be entrusted with responsibility without actual clinical exposure.

When the existing guidelines were brought to the Court's notice, the bench observed that such an arrangement of allowing affiliated hospitals to be located within a 30-kilometre radius was wholly impractical.

During the hearing, Justice Amaullah orally remarked that requiring students to travel such distances on a daily basis was "atrocious" and "shocking to the conscience of this Court."

Live Law has reported that while considering the issue, Justice Amanullah asked, "Every day the student would have to travel 40-50 km to a hospital? How is this guideline there? Nothing short of fraud on the system. 30 Kms every day a student will go for the course to hospital? This is atrocious and shocking to the conscience of this Court. How did you allow the provision to be there?"

In response, Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati submitted that she would seek instructions on whether such a provision indeed existed and whether the competent authority could revisit it.

At this outset, the bench clarified that ideally, nursing colleges should be attached to ICU hospitals and if not, such hospitals should be within a one-kilometre radius.

The bench has also issued directions to the Indian Nursing Council for submitted a report on around 800 such colleges, specifically mentioning their distances from hospitals with ICU facilities.

"The Indian Nursing Council, on query, submitted that the basic course incorporates a daily visit to an ICU as per the course curriculum for hands-on training. At this juncture, the Court expressed its surprise as to how such institutions are approved or given permission to start the institute, where clearly the said institution is miles apart from the hospital having a proper and regular ICU. The Court was informed that, as per guidelines, the said hospital can be at a distance of 30 kms. The Court is shocked, and clearly it can't be believed that students of nursing can be visiting every day, which is also imperative for the reason that at the end of the course, they have to practically work on a real patient. Without real experience, they can't be entrusted with responsibility. ASG submitted that she would take instructions as to whether such a provision is there and if it's there, the authority may have a relook," the Apex Court ordered. The top court made these observations during the hearing of a long-pending matter that concerned healthcare standards. After considering the recommendations prepared by a panel appointed by the Court and taking note of the suggestions from healthcare experts, the Apex Court issued a series of nationwide directions for strengthening the critical care infrastructure and standardising ICU facilities across India.

Apex Court's Directions on Improving ICU Standards:

During the hearing, the bench approved the framework titled "Guidelines for Organisation and Delivery of Intensive Care Services". Under this framework, ICUs have been classified into Level I, Level II and Level III categories.

The Court endorsed the classification of the ICUs into Level I, Level II, and Level III categories, observing that the proposed standards were well considered and required strict enforcement.

Further, it also emphasised the urgency of strengthening critical care infrastructure, noting that the healthcare system in the country is facing immense pressure due to the growing population of the country. This, according to the bench, is resulting in a shortage of quality emergency care facilities.

The Apex Court observed that the healthcare infrastructure of the country was struggling to keep pace with the rising demand and emphasised that access to critical care directly implicates the fundamental right to life.

Underlining that the State is obligated to ensure access to such care to protect the citizens' right to life, the bench observed, "When it comes to a person in a critical health condition, there is a real dearth and shortage of facilities to ensure that the least patient is made stable so as to give him or her further corrective measures."

The bench has directed the States and Union Territories to complete a gap assessment exercise within two months. Further, the States have also been asked to begin work on implementing minimum standards for Level I ICUs in healthcare institutions, focusing on ensuring that critically ill patients receive stabilising care in time-sensitive emergencies.

Taking note of the financial constraints in expanding the healthcare infrastructure, the Supreme Court bench recommended the States to explore funding through Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) initiatives, NGO support and public donations. It also cautioned that such funds must be ring-fenced and used only for ICU-related infrastructure.

Further, the States have been directed by the top court bench to assess the feasibility of maintaining at least five fully-equipped ambulances, including ventilator support and trained personnel, through donated funding for the transportation of the critically ill patients within districts.

Apart from these, in another major direction, the Supreme Court has asked the Centre to formulate a nationwide GPS-based system that would map the hospitals and indicate the availability of ICU along with capacity, enable faster referrals and coordinated transfers between institutions. The top court bench has also endorsed tele-ICU and tele-consultation systems and called for a digital communication grid linking hospitals.

The matter has been listed for further hearing in August, when the court-appointed committee is expected to place its final recommendations.

Medical Dialogues had previously reported that earlier this year, the Supreme Court of India had directed all the States and Union Territories to prepare a 'realistic and practical' action plan to strengthen Intensive Care Unit (ICU) facilities and implement the guidelines necessary as a minimum standard, while asking the Centre to circulate standardised ICU guidelines as an advisory.

While hearing about healthcare services, including guidelines for the treatment of patients in the ICU or critical care unit, the apex court was informed that "Guidelines for Organisation and Delivery of Intensive Care Services", on which there is consensus and which is practical, implementable and necessary as a minimum standard for an ICU, has been prepared.

Madras HC bins plea on transfer of govt staff after 3 years

Madras HC bins plea on transfer of govt staff after 3 years

Apr 10, 2026, 02.06 AM IST

Chennai: Madras high court on Thursday refused to order transfer of govt employees who have been working in the same place for more than three years. The court observed that while the Election Commission (ECI) is taking action by transferring govt servants, interference by the court is not required.

The first bench of Chief Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Justice G Arul Murugan observed this, while disposing of a plea moved by Integrated Manapparai Taluk Rainfed and Irrigated Farmers Association.

According to the petitioner, a govt order (GO) was issued in 1994 mandating the transfer of govt employees working in various departments once every three years to ensure transparency in administration and to prevent misuse of power by officials. It further alleged that govt officials working in departments such as agriculture, revenue and police have been continuing in the same postings for more than three years, and as a result, they have been selectively extending govt welfare schemes to preferred individuals.

The association also contended that govt officials must act impartially during elections, but allowing them to continue in the same post for long durations is against election conduct rules and creates a possibility of them acting in favour of the ruling party. Refusing to entertain the plea, the bench observed that transfer of govt employees is a service-related matter and such a relief cannot be sought in a PIL. The court, however, directed the ECI to consider the petitioner's representation in accordance with law.

SC orders all-India audit of pvt & deemed universities Focus On Structural Opacity & Examining Role Of Regulatory Bodies

SC orders all-India audit of pvt & deemed universities Focus On Structural Opacity & Examining Role Of Regulatory Bodies

 

Manash.Gohain@timesofindia.com New Delhi : 28.11.2025

Supreme Court has ordered an unprecedented nationwide audit of all private and deemed universities, transforming a student grievance into a deep scrutiny of India’s sprawling higher education sector. In a sweeping directive, apex court has asked Centre, all states and UTs, and University Grants Commission (UGC) to submit personally sworn affidavits disclosing how these institutions were set up, who governs them, what regulatory approvals they hold, and whether they truly function on a notfor-profit basis. 

The move comes in response to a petition filed by a student of Amity University, Ayesha Jain, who alleged the institution harassed and barred her from attending classes after she legally changed her name. What began as a single case of administrative apathy has now turned into a judicial inquisition into the governance and financial practices of the entire private university ecosystem. 

Supreme Court’s focus is clear — expose the structural opacity and examine whether regulatory bodies like UGC have adequately performed their role. Past interventions show this isn’t unfamiliar terrain. In 2005, the court struck down Chhattisgarh Private Universities Act that had allowed over 100 shell institutions to operate without basic academic infrastructure. 

In 2009, a central review found 44 deemed universities unfit for their status due to poor academic and governance standards. In 2017, a Supreme Court verdict invalidated engineering degrees awarded via unapproved distance mode by deemed universities and barred them from conducting such courses without clear regulatory approval. This current review cuts deeper. It questions how private universities acquire land, appoint leadership, handle finances, and whether they have credible grievance redressal mechanisms.

 The demand for personal accountability — from chief secretaries to the UGC chairperson — signals judicial impatience with the status quo. A UGC official, on condition of anonymity, acknowledged: “There have been longstanding compliance gaps. This is a chance to restore public trust.” The official added that in the current case, the commission “in fact recommended the university to consider the name change request”. 

Private universities, many of which operate under different state and central laws, are rattled. “This is a sweeping brush,” said a vice chancellor of a reputed state private university. “We support transparency, but we also fear being tarred with the same brush as a few errant institutions.” Observers see timing in the court’s action. Higher Education Commission of India (HECI) Bill, intended to overhaul regulation and merge UGC, AICTE, and others under one roof, is expected in the upcoming Parliament session.

 “An issue concerning a private university legislated by state law is now expanded to rope in all private deemed universities governed by separate regulations under a central law. In a similar exercise, in 2017 in the case of Orissa Lift case, an issue concerning four deemed universities affected all in an irreversible manner. With HECI round the corner, it is hoped that the present issue finds a policy solution through HECI Bill,” said an academic policy expert.

House can’t be turned into prayer meeting hall sans govt nod: Madras High Court

House can’t be turned into prayer meeting hall sans govt nod: Madras High Court 

The court said that if the petitioner intends to convert the property into a prayer hall, he should get proper permission from the district collector.

Citing a ruling on the issue, the Court said it is clear from the judgment that conducting prayer meetings in a hall requires obtaining permission from the authority concerned under the relevant rules.

Express News Service Updated on: 22 Jun 2025, 9:18 am 1

CHENNAI: The Madras High Court has held that a house cannot be converted into a prayer meeting hall without obtaining proper permission from the government authorities concerned.

Justice N Anand Venkatesh made the observation while disposing of a petition filed by L Joseph Wilson, a pastor from Kodavasal in Tiruvarur district, praying for quashing a 2024 order of the jurisdictional tahsildar to seal his house, preventing him from holding prayer meetings.

Citing a ruling on the issue, the judge said it is clear from the judgment that conducting prayer meetings in a hall requires obtaining permission from the authority concerned under the relevant rules. Hence, the petitioner cannot, as a matter of right, have a prayer hall to conduct prayer meetings without obtaining permission, he said in a recent order.

Referring to the petitioner’s undertaking that he would not use the public address system, the judge said non-usage of the loudspeaker and microphone will not solve the issue. “The crux of the issue is that the petitioner cannot convert a house into a prayer hall to conduct prayer meetings. That requires proper permission from the authorities,” he said.

The judge directed the tahsildar to remove the seal on the petitioner’s property if it is not utilised for prayer meetings. If the petitioner intends to convert the property into a prayer hall, he should get proper permission from the district collector, the judge stated, adding in case of utilisation of the building for prayer meetings, the respondent authorities can take appropriate action in accordance with the law.

Government advocate T M Rajangam appeared for the respondent authorities.

No maintenance for educated wife, HC advises her to work

No maintenance for educated wife, HC advises her to work

Abhinav.Garg@timesofindia.com 20.03.2025

New Delhi : Delhi High Court has underlined that a well-educated wife qualified to work must not deliberately remain idle, only to receive maintenance from the husband. Denying relief to one such estranged wife who did her master’s in international business from Australia and worked in Dubai but preferred not to work, the court stressed that law doesn’t promote idling. “A well-educated wife, with experience in a suitable gainful job, ought not to remain idle solely to gain maintenance from her husband. Therefore, interim maintenance is being discouraged in the present case as this court can see potential in the petitioner to earn and make good of her education,” Justice CD Singh observed on Tuesday. 

The court said wives having the earning capacity and qualification but remaining idle should not set up a claim for interim maintenance. “Section 125 of CrPC carries the legislative intent to maintain equality among the spouses, provide protection to the wives, children and parents, and not promote idleness... A well-educated wife, with ex perience in a suitable gainful job, ought not to remain idle solely to gain maintenance from her husband,” it observed, dismissing the woman’s plea against a trial court order denying her interim maintenance from her husband. HC explained that courts need to be satisfied if the wife is genuinely in need of maintenance and the factors leading to such a need for maintenance and encouraged the petitioner to look for a job to become self-sufficient, saying she had wide exposure and was aware of worldly affairs, unlike other uneducated women who were completely dependent on their spouses for basic sustenance. 

“This court is unable to comprehend the fact as to why, despite being able-bodied and well qualified, the petitioner has chosen to remain idle since her return to India,” the bench noted, acknowledging her qualifications and past employment record. “There is no reason why she ought not to be in a position to also maintain herself in the future.” It added that though the woman claimed she was trying to find a job, neither did she place any evidence to support her claim nor resume her business activities. “Mere assertion of job-seeking, without corroborative evidence, is insufficient to establish genuine efforts of self-sufficiency,” it noted. The court highlighted WhatsApp chats between the woman and her mother where the latter advises that employment would jeopardise the alimony claims. 

“This communication, preceding the maintenance petition, strongly suggests a deliberate attempt to remain unemployed to seek maintenance claims,” the court said. The couple married in Dec 2019 and left for Singapore. The woman said she returned to India in Feb 2021 allegedly because of the cruelty meted out to her by her estranged husband and his family members. In June 2021, she filed a petition for maintenance.