Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
MANMOHAN, NAVIN CHAWLA
Patil Gajendra Shivaji – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to disciplinary action. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. petitioner's contentions against the penalty. (Para 4) |
| 3. details of misconduct confirmed by evidence. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. writ petition dismissed due to lack of merit. (Para 7) |
JUDGMENT
Manmohan, J. (Oral)--Present writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned orders dated 27th August, 2019, 27th January, 2020 and 05th March, 2021 whereby the disciplinary authority awarded to the petitioner the penalty of removal from service which was subsequently confirmed by the Appellate Authority as well as the Reviewing Authority. Petitioner also seeks all other consequential benefits, namely, reinstatement in services with full back wages, interest, seniority, and due promotions etc.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner, who was enrolled with CISF, while serving in CISF Unit Nalco Angul, Odisha was served with a major penalty charge-sheet under Rule 36 of CISF Rules 2001 (Amended Rules 2003). He states that the petitioner was awarded the penalty of removal from service with immediate effect by the Disciplinary Authority which was upheld by the Appellate Authority.
3. He states that since
Disciplinary authorities can impose removal from service for proven serious misconduct; past penalties may be considered, but each case must adhere to procedural standards without arbitrary penalties....
Disciplinary proceedings must prioritize conduct and efficiency; failure to engage in due process can lead to disciplinary action despite claims of injustice.
The penalty of removal from service for intoxication while on duty is justified as it constitutes gross indiscipline, affirming the primacy of the Disciplinary Authority's discretion in such matters.
Disciplinary authorities must establish charges of misconduct with sufficient evidence; modifications to penalties must balance discipline with compassion.
The court upheld the removal of a constable for repeated indiscipline, affirming the adherence to procedural safeguards in disciplinary proceedings.
Acquittal in a criminal case does not automatically lead to exoneration from departmental disciplinary proceedings, and the nature of the criminal charges and mitigating factors should be considered ....
The Court upheld the penalty of removal from service based on the petitioner's admission of charges, failure to submit written explanations, and the consideration of the petitioner's previous conduct....
The court emphasizes that significant delays in pursuing remedies may result in dismissal of claims based on laches and waiver of rights, particularly in employment disputes.
The punishment imposed must be proportionate to the gravity of the proved charges, and the court will interfere only if the punishment is shockingly disproportionate.
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
