Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
MANMOHAN, ASHA MENON
Aneesh Ahmad – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. disciplinary action for misconduct (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. doubt about allegations and proportionate penalty (Para 5 , 7) |
| 3. conduct reflecting moral turpitude (Para 6 , 8) |
| 4. final dismissal of petition (Para 9 , 10) |
JUDGMENT
Asha Menon, J. (Oral)
CM No.3783/2021
Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
W.P. (C) 1348/2021, CM APPL. 3782/2021
1. The petition has been heard by way of video conferencing.
2. The petition has been filed by an ex-ASI/Clerk of the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) with the following prayers:-
"a) Issue a writ of Certiorary, or any other appropriate writ, setting aside impugned order bearing Letter No. V- 11014/APS/Rev-08/AA/LC/2020- 6794 dated 31.08.2020, passed by the Office of the Spl. Director General/APS, Central Industrial Security Force (Ministry of Home Affairs) through Sh Vikram Singh Mann, Inspector General/APS-I rejecting the Revision Petition filed by the petitioner against the penalty of 'dismissal from service' awarded by the Disciplinary Authority, Commandant, ASG, Amritsar, vide his F.O No. V-15014/CISF/ASG- A/Rule-36/A.A./2019/6408 dated 20.07.2019 and upheld by DIG/AP-NZ/Hqs, New Delhi being the Appellate
The dismissal of a Central Industrial Security Force member for misconduct involving a minor is justified and proportional to the gravity of the offense.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the principle that the punishment imposed pursuant to disciplinary proceedings would only be interfered with if it was so disproportionate that it ....
Disciplinary actions in armed forces must align with established judicial principles of proportionality; actions substantiated through evidence uphold dismissals for habitual misconduct.
Dismissal from service is a harsh punishment and requires a more objective approach, and the circumstances must be sufficient to justify dismissal without a disciplinary inquiry.
The proportionality of punishment in disciplinary proceedings and the consideration of previous misconduct in determining the appropriate punishment.
The gravity of charges and the authority's power to modify penalties under Rule 54 of the CISF Rules were central to the judgment.
Disciplinary authority's decision upheld due to adherence to procedural fairness and proportionality of punishment to misconduct.
Departmental enquiry proceeded against the petitioners in both the cases and the consequential order of dismissal from service pertained to the same incident and the same materials were relied upon b....
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
