Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
JAGMOHAN BANSAL
Gurinder Singh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Punjab – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's disciplinary challenges. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. challenge based on fir being set aside. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. judicial review limitations in disciplinary matters. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 4. confirmation of findings and procedural correctness. (Para 8) |
| 5. final ruling of dismissal. (Para 9) |
JUDGMENT :
1. The petitioner through instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is seeking setting aside of:
(ii) Order dated 16.04.2024 (Annexure P-7) whereby his appeal has been dismissed; and
2. The petitioner is part of Punjab Police Force. An FIR No.235 dated 23.12.2023, under Sections 326, 325, 324, 323, 506, 148 and 149 of IPC at Police Station Sadar, Tarn Taran was registered against him. On account of said FIR, he was suspended vide order dated 23.12.2023 and a departmental inquiry was initiated. The aforesaid FIR came to be set aside vide order dated 20.09.2023 passed by this Court in CRM-M No.37259 of 2023 titled as ‘Gurbir Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and others’. The petitioner was found guilty by Enquiry Officer. The Enquiry Officer submitted his report to SSP who issued show cause notice dated 20.06.2023 calling upon the petitioner to show cause as
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.
Judicial review of disciplinary actions is limited to procedural fairness and legality, not the merits of factual conclusions.
The court affirmed that its jurisdiction in disciplinary matters is limited, focusing on procedural adherence and not reappraising evidence unless the punishment is grossly disproportionate.
The main legal point established in the given judgment is the limited scope of judicial review in disciplinary inquiries and the principles of proportionality and the Wednesbury rule.
Judicial review of disciplinary proceedings is limited to checking the decision-making process; courts cannot reassess evidence unless penalties are shockingly disproportionate.
Judicial review in disciplinary matters is limited; courts may intervene if the penalty is shockingly disproportionate to the misconduct.
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
