Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND, J
R. Magadaiah Ex Constable S/o Shri Rangaiah – Appellant
Versus
I.G. Crpf, Rajasthan Sector, Kendriya Sadan – Respondent
Order :
1. By way of filing of this petition, a challenge has been led to the impugned order dated 11.10.2008, by which the petitioner has been dismissed from service. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the petitioner preferred a departmental appeal, however, the same was also rejected vide order dated 27.09.2012 and the order passed by the Disciplinary Authority dated 11.10.2018 was upheld.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was granted leave with effect from 26.08.2007 till 25.10.2007 on account of back pain, however, he could not report on the duty and submitted an application before the higher authorities for extension of his leave. Counsel submits that the petitioner was arrested and confined and thereafter, charge-sheet was served upon him with the charge that he entered into the room of a fellow Constable un-authorizedly and stayed there. Counsel submits that when the Departmental Enquiry was conducted against the petitioner, statements of the wife of the fellow Constable, i.e., Poornima were recorded wherein she denied the allegations levelled against the petitioner, hence, under these circumstances, the services of the petitioner should not have
The principle of proportionality mandates that disciplinary punishment must be commensurate with the gravity of the misconduct, and dismissal for minor infractions may be deemed excessive.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the limited scope of interference in disciplinary proceedings, emphasizing the need for evidence-based findings and the principles of proportionali....
Judicial review in disciplinary matters is limited; courts cannot reassess evidence or interfere unless findings are arbitrary or unsupported by evidence.
Judicial review of disciplinary actions is limited to examining procedural fairness, not re-evaluating evidence; proportionality of punishment must be considered within the context of the employee's ....
The standard of proof in disciplinary proceedings is based on preponderance of probabilities, and courts will not interfere unless the punishment is shockingly disproportionate to the misconduct.
The High Court does not act as an appellate authority in disciplinary matters and will not interfere with the quantum of punishment unless it is shocking to the conscience.
The court upheld the dismissal of a disciplined force member for unauthorized absence and providing false information, emphasizing the importance of discipline and the limited scope of judicial revie....
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
