The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's power to modify the punishment if it shocks the judicial conscience, as well as the requirement for proportionality in imposing disciplinary actions.

1. The petitioner before this Court has filed this present petition for quashment of Annexure P-18 and Annexure P-20 by which his services have been put to an end as well as the order rejecting the appeal/revision.

2. The facts as stated in the writ petition reveal that the petitioner was appointed as a cook vide order dated 09.08.2002 in the pay-scale of Rs.2610-7040/-and while he was in the services of Central Reserve Police Force, a charge-sheet was issued on 10.03.2014. The petitioner did submit a reply to the charges and thereafter, a departmental enquiry was held against the petitioner. The inquiry officer held the petitioner guilty of charge No.1 and held the petitioner partially guilty in respect of charge No.2.

3. The following charges were levelled against the petitioner as per the imputation of misconduct:-

(1) that, on 14.02.2014 (after noon) without obtaining prior permission of the competent authority, the delinquent has gone out of the camp and consumed liquor. Same is a misconduct keeping in view Rule 11(1) of the Central Reserve Police Force Act, 1949.

(2) that, on 14.02.2014, without obtaining permission i.e. on the same day, he had visited the house of Gopal S/o Bhanwarlal and in his absence he went to the roof top and certain clothes were set on fire.

4. In the departmental enquiry, the charge No.2 was proved partially, meaning thereby, he went out of the camp without permission, however, the factum of putting clothes on fire was not established. So far as charge No.1 is concerned, it was established on the basis of evidence of the witnesses that he went out of the camp without obtaining prior permission from the authorities.

5. The inquiry report, which is on record reflects that the petitioner went out of the camp on a motorcycle and he met with an accident and sustained injuries and was brought back on the next day. Otherwise also, the charge No.1 has been proved against the present petitioner.

6. The respondents have filed a reply and they have stated that the petitioner was given a fair opportunity to defend himself and the principles of natural justice and fair play were observed and in case of a departmental enquiry the misconduct has to be proved on the basis of preponderance of probability and it is not like a criminal case where misconduct has to be proved beyond reasonable doubt.

7. Learned Additional Solicitor General has argued before this Court that in absence of any perversity in respect of the inquiry report, the question of interference by this Court does not arise. He has stated that even if the charge No.1 has been proved, it is good enough for his dismissal as no legal permission was obtained to leave the camp.

8. This Court has carefully gone through the inquiry report, the charge sheet, the order of punishment as well as the order rejecting the appeal/revision.

9. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued before this Court that the charge-sheet was issued under Section 11(1) of Central Reserve Police Force, 1949. Section 11 of the Act reads as under:-

“Section 11 in the Central Reserve Police Force Act, 1949.

11. Minor punishments.—

(1) The Commandant or any other authority or officer as may be prescribed, may, subject to any rules made under this Act, award in lieu of, or in addition to, suspension or dismissal any one or more of the following punishments to any member of the Force whom he considers to be guilty of disobedience, neglect of duty, or remissness in the discharge of any duty or of other misconduct in his capacity as a member of the Force, that is to say,—

(a) reduction in rank;

(b) fine of any amount not exceeding one month’s pay and allowances;

(c) confinement to quarters, lines or camp for a term not exceeding one month;

(d) confinement in the quarter-guard for not more than twenty-eight days, with or without punishment drill or extra guard, fatigue or other duty; and

(e) removal from any office of distinction or special emolument in the Force.

(2) Any punishment spe