Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Sri Ananda Sen, J
Arvind Kumar Singh S/o Manejar Singh – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
ORDER :
ANANDA SEN, J.
In this writ petition, petitioner has challenged the order passed by the revisional authority as contained in letter No.11015/East/LC/Rev-01/ 2022- 546, dated 31.01.2022; the order passed by the appellate authority as contained in letter No.V-14013/BSL/CISF/LEGAL/AKS/2021-6843-(E) dated 20.11.2021 as also the order passed by the Disciplinary Authority as contained in letter No. V-15014/CISF/BSL/Admn.-II/A.K.Singh/Major/21-841 dated 25.08.2021 whereby and whereunder punishment of “reduction of pay by one stage from Rs.35,300/- in Level 4 of Pay Matrix to Rs.34,300/- in Level 4 of Pay Matrix for a period of one year with immediate effect; and it was directed that he will not earn increment of pay during the period of reduction and on expiry of the above period, the reduction will have the effect of postponing his future increments of pay” was awarded to the petitioner.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the punishment imposed upon the petitioner, i.e., lowering of his pay by one stage in pay matrix is absolutely illegal. He submitted that petitioner had no other option, but to leave the Quarantine Centre during the Covid period because, it was n
Judicial review in departmental proceedings is limited, and unless the punishment is shocking or impermissible, courts should not interfere with disciplinary authority decisions.
The court ruled on the necessity of proportionality in disciplinary action, emphasizing that harsh penalties must be justified and aligned with the seriousness of the misconduct.
The High Court confirmed that the Disciplinary Authority's decision to impose a penalty is sustainable if procedures are adhered to and the findings are not perverse, maintaining limited judicial rev....
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.
Departmental proceedings require strict adherence to the principles of natural justice, including the substantiation of charges with cogent evidence; mere allegations are insufficient.
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....
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
