Back
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
PARTHA SARATHI CHATTERJEE
Sanjit Sahu – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J.
Preface
1. In questioning the tenability and/or legality of the final order dated 29.01.2021, issued by the Commandant, CISF Unit DTPS, Durgapur, which imposed a penalty of reduction in the petitioner's pay by one stage in the time scale of pay (from Rs. 35,300/- to Rs. 34,300/- in Level-4, with a pay range of Rs. 25,500/- to Rs. 81,100/-) for a period of two years, during which the petitioner would not be entitled to earn increments and future increments would be postponed, and in questioning the authority of the respondents to seize the petitioner's pen camera, manipulate it, and access the petitioner's personal photos and videos, and also seeking a directive to the respondents to properly consider the petitioner's representation, the present writ petition has been filed.
Facts
2. Before delving into the contour of controversy centered around the writ petition, it would to be apt to narrate the key facts, as projected in the writ petition, which are as follows:
a) The petitioner joined the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) as a Constable/GD. On 1st May, 2018, he was posted to CISF Unit, DTPS, Durgapur, and was allotted accommodation at HD
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 court upheld the disciplinary penalty on the petitioner for gross negligence while on duty, emphasizing the significance of maintaining strict discipline in security forces.
The absence of a Presenting Officer does not vitiate disciplinary proceedings if conducted fairly, and misconduct is defined as conduct inconsistent with the faithful discharge of duty.
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.
Disciplinary proceedings must adhere to principles of natural justice, including providing access to relevant evidence. Failure to follow these may invalidate the proceedings.
Disciplinary proceedings must follow the principles of natural justice, including the right to evidence, but non-supply of evidence does not invalidate proceedings if the accused received a fair chan....
The principle of proportionality of punishment is crucial in determining the appropriate penalty for proved charges of misconduct.
The court's decision emphasizes the importance of upholding discipline and proportionate penalties in disciplinary proceedings.
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
