Back
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
ANANYA BANDYOPADHYAY
Jana Priya Acharjee – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
ANANYA BANDYOPADHYAY, J.
1. The petitioner, a Constable of the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF), bearing Force No.944521079, has approached this Court invoking its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus to quash and set aside the final order of punishment dated 03.10.2008, bearing No.V- 15014/DSP/Disc/Maj/JPA/08-10464 as well as the purported revision order dated 27.07.2009, bearing No.V-11014/NES/LC/Rev-24/2009-5739, together with all consequential benefits attendant thereto.
2. The petitioner was, at the relevant point of time, posted at the CISF Unit, Durgapur Steel Plant (DSP), and was assigned duty on 20.04.2008 from 13:00 hrs. to 21:00 hrs. between Watch Towers Nos.02 and 03 of the Alloy Steel Plant (ASP). The said stretch of deployment was proximate to boundary wall pillars 299 to 301, adjoining the slag dump yard, a location identified as sensitive due to storage of scrap metal of considerable quantity and value.
3. During his duty hours at or about 20:40 hrs., an incident occurred wherein a group of approximately 12 to 13 miscreants allegedly entered the slag dump area and attemp
Disciplinary proceedings conducted in accordance with statutory rules upheld; failure to prevent a security breach justified penalty of withheld increments.
The court upheld the disciplinary penalty on the petitioner for gross negligence while on duty, emphasizing the significance of maintaining strict discipline in security forces.
Disciplinary actions must adhere to established procedures, and courts will not interfere unless the punishment is shockingly disproportionate or the process violated natural justice.
Procedural safeguards, fair hearing, and compliance with statutory mandates are essential in disciplinary proceedings, and the violation of such safeguards can render the disciplinary action void.
The High Court will not interfere with the findings of fact arrived at in departmental enquiry proceedings except in a case of mala fides or perversity. The quantum of punishment in disciplinary matt....
The Disciplinary Authority may independently impose penalties based on a preponderance of evidence, even if the Enquiry Officer finds the accused innocent, provided proper procedures are followed.
Disciplinary proceedings must adhere to the principles of natural justice, including supplying relevant documents, but if no prejudice is established, the proceedings may still be upheld.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
