IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Jagmohan Bansal, J.
Jagpal Sharma - Petitioner - Appellant
Versus
Union of India and Others - Respondents - Respondent
CWP-19694 of 2015
Decided On : 03-07-2023
Certiorari - Termination from Service - Quantum of Punishment
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought writ of Certiorari to quash the order dismissing him from service and rejecting his appeal, arguing that the punishment of termination was disproportionate to the alleged offence.
Finding of the Court:
The court quashed the orders to the extent of quantum of punishment, remanding the matter back to the competent authority to reconsider the punishment in light of a judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
Issues: Disproportionate punishment, Application of relevant judgment
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in B.S. Hari Commandant, which was cited by the petitioner's counsel and led the respondents to agree to reconsider the punishment.
Final Decision: The impugned orders were quashed to the extent of quantum of punishment, and the matter was remanded back to the competent authority for reconsideration.
JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J.
1. The petitioner, through instant writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking writ of Certiorari quashing order dated 12.02.2015 (Annexure P-3) passed by respondent No.3 whereby petitioner has been dismissed from service and order dated 10.07.2015 (Annexure P-5) passed by respondent No.2 whereby appeal of the petitioner has been rejected.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that petitioner has been terminated on the ground that he has committed offence punishable under Section 354 read with Section 448 of the Ranbir Penal Code. The petitioner joined service as General Duty Constable with 32nd Battalion Border Security Force on 20.08.1998. The impugned order came to be passed in the year 2015. During his service, the petitioner was adorned with 30 rewards including 4 Commendation Cards. The petitioner has been awarded punishment of termination of services which is harsh and it is disproportionate to the alleged offence. The case of the petitioner is squarely covered by a judgment of two Judge Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in B.S. Hari Commandant Versus Union of India and Others; 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 303.
3. On being confronted with the aforesaid judgment, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the competent authority would reconsider case of the petitioner qua quantum of punishment in the light of aforesaid judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
4. In view of afore-stated statement of learned counsel for the respondents and judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in B.S. Hari Commandant (supra), the impugned order dated 12.02.2015 (Annexure P-3) and order dated 10.07.2015 (Annexure P-5) are hereby quashed to the extent of quantum of punishment. The matter is remanded back to the competent authority to pass afresh order qua quantum of punishment after considering facts of the present case and judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in B.S. Hari Commandant (supra). The petitioner at the first instant shall appear before the competent authority on 13.07.2023 at 11:00 AM and thereafter as directed by the competent authority. The competent authority, considering the fact that matter is pending for a quite long time, would pass an appropriate order within 2 months from 13.07.2023.
Disposed of in aforesaid terms.
Order accordingly.
The court emphasized the importance of maintaining discipline in a force and upheld the penalty of dismissal from service based on the serious nature of the charges.
The court established that the condonation of misconduct occurs when an authority fails to take action against an employee for a significant period, and that denial of full pay without due process vi....
The High Court's review in disciplinary matters is constrained to procedural correctness and does not extend to re-evaluating evidence or punishment unless grossly disproportionate.
Disciplinary punishment must align with the severity of the misconduct, and excessive penalties can be subject to judicial review and modification.
The dismissal from service must be proportionate to the alleged misconduct and should not violate constitutional provisions such as double jeopardy. The imposition of punishment should adhere to the ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the principle of proportionality in imposing disciplinary action, the requirement for clear and specific charges in a domestic inquiry, and the sco....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.