SHIVARAJ V.PATIL, ARIJIT PASAYAT
State Of U. P. – Appellant
Versus
HARENDRA KUMAR – Respondent
ORDER
1. WHEN CERTAIN MISCONDUCT CAME TO THE NOTICE OF THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY, A PRELIMINARY ENQUIRY WAS ORDERED TO ASCERTAIN AS TO WHETHER THERE WAS ANY NEED TO INITIATE DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDING OR NOT. AFTER PRELIMINARY ENQUIRY AND IN THE LIGHT OF THE PRELIMINARY ENQUIRY REPORT, DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS WERE INITIATED AGAINST THE RESPONDENT ON THE CHARGE THAT WHILE HE WAS ON DUTY HE HAS CONSUMED LIQUOR AND ABUSED ANOTHER CONSTABLE WHEN HE WAS ON DUTY. THEREAFTER, A REGULAR ENQUIRY WAS HELD AND ON THE BASIS OF THE MATERIAL PLACED IN THE ENQUIRY, THE ENQUIRY OFFICER HAVING RECORDED A FINDING THAT THE CHARGE LEVELLED AGAINST THE RESPONDENT WAS PROVED, MADE THE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDATIONS:
"TASK FORCE BATTALION IS ARMED WITH SOPHISTICATED WEAPONS AND A MINOR DIVERSION OR NEGLIGENCE CAN PROVE FATAL. THEREFORE IT IS DANGEROUS IF AN EMPLOYEE IS ON DUTY WHILE IN INEBRIATED STATE.
BEING IN AN INTOXICATED STATE WHILE REPORTING ON DUTY AND SHOWING INDISCIPLINE IS NOT SOMETHING APPRECIATED OR DESIRED IN TASK FORCE OR PAC, A DISCIPLINARY FORCE. THEREFORE IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THIS CONSTABLE HARENDRA KUMAR 56306 MAY BE DISMISSED FROM SERVICE UNDER THE PROVISION OF RULE 14(1) OF THE D.P. POLICE
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.