The court emphasized the authority's power to enhance punishment within the specified time frame and the permissibility of disciplinary proceedings despite acquittal in a criminal case.

JUDGMENT :

R. Subbiah, J

Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent against the Order dated 26.10.2018 passed by this Court in WP No. 5803 of 2017.

1. Aggrieved by the order dated 26.10.2018 passed by the learned single Judge in WP No. 5803 of 2017, the present appeal is filed.

2. The respondent herein has filed WP No. 5803 of 2017 before the learned single Judge praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records culminated in the first respondent's order of compulsory retirement in Ref.R.C. No. 11383/AP.2 (1)/2009 dated 01.12.2016 and quash the same and consequently direct the appellants to reinstate him in service with all consequential monetary, promotional and service benefits.

3. The order dated 01.12.2016, which was challenged before the learned single Judge, was passed by the first respondent, whereby, the first respondent, in exercise of suo motu powers conferred under Rule 15-A(i) (iii) of The Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1955, modified the order dated 03.11.2008 passed by the second respondent, imposing the punishment of "reduction of time scale of pay by two stages for one year without cumulative effect" into one of "compulsory retirement from service."

4. For the purpose of adjudication of this appeal, certain facts are necessary and they are elucidated hereunder.

5. The respondent herein was recruited as Police Constable in the year 1988. Subsequently, he was promoted as Head Constable during the year 2004. While he was working as Head Constable at Palayamkottai in Tirunelveli District, he was deputed on Special duty during the month of March 2006 along with Thiru. Senthilnathan, Sub-Inspector of Police; Grade I PC 904 Sivaraman and Grade I PC 996 for investigation of a case registered on 24.03.2006 in Palayamkottai Police Station in Crime No.327 of 2006 under Section 302 of IPC and Crime No.331 of 2006 under Sections 147, 148, 302, 506 (Part-ii) of IPC to arrest the accused concerned in those cases. On 24.03.2006, the petitioner and others visited Nagercoil, KTC Nagar and Chettikulam in search of the accused. Thereafter, they returned to Parvathy Sankar Complex Lodge at 12.45 pm on 27.03.2006 at Vannarapettai where, they, along with the owner of the complex by name Ramesh and his friend Durai @ Selladurai, had a liquor party. During such liquor party, in an inebriated mood, Sivaraman, Grade IPC is said to have passed some derogatory comments over the modesty of Women Police Constable Prabha, which had resulted in a scuffle between Sivaraman and the respondent herein. At that time, while Sivaraman attempted to go to the bathroom in the ground floor, the respondent is said to have kicked him on his hip. In that process, Sivaraman fell down from the steps of the lodge at about 3.15 am on 28.03.2006 and fainted. Immediately, the respondent, the Sub Inspector of Police Tr. Senthilnathan and the lodge owner had taken the injured Sivaraman to Sorna Snacks Tea Shop, Vannarapettai and laid down him before the said Tea Shop, with an ulterior motive to make the incident look like an accident. Later, at about 04.10 am, the tea shop owner and Mr. Durairaj, Watchman of Sakthi Hospital admitted Sivaraman in the hospital. On the same day at 7.30 am, the said Sivaraman died. However, the incident was not brought to the notice of the superior officers either by the respondent or by the Sub-Inspector Senthilnathan. While so, on the basis of the confession statement of the lodge owner, a criminal case was registered against the respondent and others. The respondent was arrested and in view of his arrest, he was suspended from service on 31.03.2006 afternoon. The department initiated departmental proceeding under Rule 3(b) of TNPSS (D & A) Rules, against the respondent and others as a measure of taking simultaneous departmental action during the pendency of criminal trial. The co-delinquent Senthilnathan was also under the same charges. The charges are as foll