Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
MANMOHAN, ASHA MENON
Prabhakaran Unnithan – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. disciplinary proceedings and charges against the petitioner. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. defense against charges and evidence requirements. (Para 4) |
| 3. court's view on evidence and punishment rationale. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. dismissal of the petition. (Para 7) |
JUDGMENT
Asha Menon, J. The petitioner is a Head-Constable (GD) with the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) and is aggrieved by the order dated 14th May, 2020 passed by the office of the Inspector General, CISF DAE & DOS Sector, HQrs., New Delhi rejecting the Revision Petition filed by him challenging the order dated 31st October, 2019 of DIG, DOS Zone-I HQrs., Bengaluru only partly allowing the appeal against the penalty awarded to him by the Disciplinary Authority, Commandant, CISF Unit VSSC Thumba vide his order dated 19th August, 2019.
2. The brief facts as are relevant for the purposes of the disposal of the present petition are that the petitioner was served with a Charge Memorandum No.V-15014/CISF/VSSC/Disc/Maj-01/PU/2019/2296 dated 16th May, 2019 under Rule-36 of the CISF Rules, 2001 on the following Articles of Charge:
ARTICLE -I
"An act of gross misconduct and indiscipline on the part of No. 892299951 HC/GD
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 authority's decision upheld due to adherence to procedural fairness and proportionality of punishment to misconduct.
Disciplinary actions in armed forces must align with established judicial principles of proportionality; actions substantiated through evidence uphold dismissals for habitual misconduct.
The punishment of compulsory retirement was disproportionate to the gravity of the offense of having excess pocket money.
The proportionality of punishment in disciplinary proceedings and the consideration of previous misconduct in determining the appropriate punishment.
Disciplinary proceedings must prioritize conduct and efficiency; failure to engage in due process can lead to disciplinary action despite claims of injustice.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the importance of discipline and hierarchical structure in uniformed services, particularly in cases involving assault on a senior officer.
Disciplinary proceedings require adherence to natural justice but allow limited judicial intervention unless gross violations occur; negligence established justifies penalties imposed.
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
