Disciplinary punishment must align with the severity of the misconduct, and excessive penalties can be subject to judicial review and modification.

JUDGMENT :

A.C. Behera, J.

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner against the Opposite Parties praying for setting aside(quashing) an order dated 07.06.2004 vide Annexure-4 passed in Proceeding No.16 of 2003 by the Commandant, O.S.A.P., 4^th Battalion, Rourkela(Opposite Party No.3) against the petitioner for his removal from the service w.e.f. 07.06.2004 as well as the order of confirmation to that Annexure-4 passed by the I.G. of Police SAP, Orissa, Cuttack(Opposite Party No.2) and D.G. of Police, Orissa, Cuttack(Opposite Party No.1) in appeal and revision respectively and to direct the Opposite Parties to reinstate him(petitioner) in his service giving anti-dated effect and also to direct to the Opposite Parties to treat the period of suspension as duty.

2. The case of the petitioner is that, he(petitioner-Rohit Kumar Sahu) was properly selected in an interview as a Sepoy and on dated 07.07.1989, he was duly appointed as a Sepoy and his number was Sepoy/335. He was posted at 4^th Battalion, Rourkela. Accordingly, since 07.07.1989, he was discharging his duties with utmost devotion, commitment and stainless to all concerned. His service carrier was spotless, unblemished. While, he was continuing as a Sepoy, he was elected on dated 23.08.2002 as the Secretary of Branch Association, 4^th Battalion O.S.A.P.

On dated 04.12.2003, he was commanded by his immediate superior to go on deputation to Barbil Police Station in the district of Keonjhar, but, to that effect no written order was issued. So, the petitioner made a representation on dated 05.12.2003 to the Commandant, O.S.A.P., 4^th Battalion, Rourkela(Opposite Party No.3) not to depute him to Barbil Police Station, as the same is outside the Battalion of the Headquarters in view of the letter of A.I.G. dated 22.06.1985. Because, he is the Secretary of Branch Association, 4^th Battalion and it is required for him to be stationed at Headquarters, as in the said letter, it was specifically indicated that, the office bearers of the Association, i.e., President, Secretary and Cashier should be stationed at Headquarters.

While, his representation vide Annexure-1 series was under consideration, a show-cause was issued to him on dated 10.12.2003 vide Anenxure-2 alleging disobedience of the order of his superior, then, a departmental proceeding vide Proceeding No.16 dated 10.12.2003 was initiated against him and enquiry was conducted. The Enquiring Officer submitted report in Proceeding No.16 of 2003 vide Annexure-3 stating that, the charge framed against him(petitioner) relating to his disobedience to the order of his superior is proved.

3. On the basis of the said enquiry report vide Annexure-3, the Disciplinary Authority, i.e., Opposite Party No.3 passed an order on dated 07.06.2004 vide Annexure-4 removing/dismissing him(petitioner) from the service w.e.f. 07.06.2004 on the ground of his gross utter indiscipline conduct and disobedience of the order of the authority assigning the reasons that,

“conduct of the petitioner, i.e., refusing to receive Command Certificate to proceed for Government duty and disobedience to the order of the authority does not deserve him to continue in a disciplined Police Department. His continuance in the department will poisionous to the disciplined department, which will reflect to the other forces and his suspension period w.e.f. 09.12.2003 A.M. to 11.12.2003 P.M.(total three days) is treated as such.”

4. On being dissatisfied with the above removal of the petitioner from the service passed on dated 07.06.2004 vide Annexure-4 by the Disciplinary Authority(Opposite Party No.3), he (petitioner) challenged the