Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M.DHANDAPANI
R. Muthukumar – Appellant
Versus
Director General of Police, Chennai – Respondent
ORDER :
1. This Writ Petition has been filed praying to quash the order passed by the 3rd respondent in Rc. No A4 / PR No.19 / 2021 dated 23.09.2021 and the consequent order passed by the 2nd Respondent in C.No C1/Appeal - 24 / 2021 dated 29.10.2021 and the consequent order passed by the 1st Respondent in Rc. No 009932/ AP. 3 (1) / 2021 dated 23.04.2022 and consequently to direct the Respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service with all continuation, service benefits and monetary benefits to the petitioner.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was recruited as Grade-II Police Constable on 27.01.2013 and he was discharging unblemished duty as dutiful police officer. While he was in duty in Poonamallee Battalion TANGO-12, the petitioner’s child was affected with jaundice and he could not report for duty on 13.04.2021. At the relevant point of time, there was second wave of covid pandemic. He also suffered with ill health, thereby the third respondent passed a preliminary order on 03.05.2021 and treated the petitioner as deserter and further directed the petitioner to appear before the third respondent on or before 11.06.2021. On r
Disciplinary punishment must be proportionate to the offense, and dismissal for unauthorized absence is excessive compared to lesser disciplinary actions.
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.
The Court emphasized the importance of integrity and devotion to duty in Uniformed Services, and held that unauthorized absence, even with medical grounds, may justify dismissal from service.
Disciplinary actions must follow due process, and absence due to illness cannot be deemed willful misconduct without proper inquiry.
Habitual unauthorised absence, failure to comply with orders, and proportionality of punishment in disciplinary actions
Disciplinary action must consider proportionality of punishment in light of circumstances, including health issues, and proper procedure must be followed to ensure fair treatment.
Disciplinary dismissal for serious unauthorized absence upheld as proper under CRPF Act, affirming authority in service conduct over mere appeal of punishment severity.
Unauthorized absence without compelling circumstances and habitual absenteeism can lead to disciplinary action, and the lack of devotion to duty can justify the punishment of removal from service.
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
