Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
M. Jothiraman
K.Gnanasekaran – Appellant
Versus
Director General of Police, Office of the Director General of Police – Respondent
ORDER :
M. Jothiraman, J.
Under assail is the punishment order passed by the third respondent dated 28.01.2017 and the proceedings dated 06.01.2019 issued by the first respondent.
2.The case of the petitioner is that he was enlisted on 25.10.1993 as Grade II Police Constable in Tamil Nadu Special Police and thereafter, promoted as Grade I Constable in the year 2003 and subsequently, promoted as Head Constable in the year 2008. He had obtained two medals from the Hon'ble Chief Minister, Tamilnadu for his service during 2004 and 2013. A charge memo was issued on 05.07.2016 under Rule 3(b) of the Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate Service (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1955. He submitted his explanation on 03.11.2016. Charge was that one Prem @ Prem Anand is a political man and that the petitioner having friendship and in order to extract money, he had illegally helped and assisted the said Prem @ Prem Anand in preparing petition under RTI Act. The said Prem @ Prem Anand with the petition threatened and blackmailed one Mr.Srinivasan, owner of Sabarees Hotel and south RTO Mr.Singaravelu to extract money. Therefore, two cases were registered before S.S.Colony Police Station, Madurai in Cr.No.235
The court reaffirmed that disciplinary proceedings are distinct from criminal trials, emphasizing judicial review's limitation to procedural fairness and legal compliance.
Disciplinary proceedings must adhere to procedural rules and principles of natural justice; judicial review does not extend to re-evaluating evidence unless there are violations of these principles.
The enquiry officer's dual role as prosecutor violated principles of natural justice, rendering the disciplinary proceedings invalid.
Disciplinary findings must be based on legally admissible evidence; lack of evidence warrants judicial intervention under Article 226.
The court upheld the dismissal of the petitioner, affirming that the inquiry was conducted fairly and in accordance with legal principles, with no grounds for interference.
The judgment emphasizes the importance of adhering to the procedures and principles of natural justice as per the relevant disciplinary rules, and highlights that the breach of such provisions does n....
The court emphasized the limited scope of judicial interference in departmental enquiries and the principle that the High Court cannot act as a second court of first appeal.
The court emphasized the importance of adhering to procedural rules and highlighted the impermissibility of relying on statements made during preliminary enquiry in disciplinary proceedings.
The court emphasized the importance of maintaining discipline and the requirement to prove prejudice in cases of non-serving of enquiry report, affirming the authority's discretion in disciplinary pr....
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
