Tamil Nadu   

Dismissal of constable upheld

Special Correspondent

He overstayed his leave without permission

CHENNAI: The Madras High Court has upheld the dismissal of a Central Reserve Police Force constable who overstayed his leave.

Setting aside a single judge order directing the CRPF to reinstate P. Gurunathan with back wages and consequential service benefits, including seniority and increments, the Bench comprising the Chief Justice Markandey Katju and F.M. Ibrahim Kalifulla said: "The petitioner is a member of a disciplined force in which strict discipline was required, and an over-liberal approach cannot be accepted. He overstayed leave without prior permission and failed to comply with the orders of the competent authority, which is a serious misconduct." Mr. Gurunathan was removed from service in August 1993 after he overstayed his leave for 61 days after completing the 60-day leave granted by his Punjab-based battalion commandant. After his telegram on extension of his stay on medical grounds was received, he was asked to send medical documents in support of his alleged illness and treatment. He failed to do so, and submitted proof only after his return. Even during inquiry he was afforded sufficient opportunity to furnish evidence. With his explanations failing to convince the competent authority, the termination orders were served. However, on challenge, the single judge concluded that the punishment was disproportionate to the offence and ordered his reinstatement. Setting aside the single judge order, the Bench said, "the CRPF is a disciplined force where every member is expected to observe strict discipline. Any act of indiscipline on the part of a member affects the morale and efficiency of the force and therefore it is necessary to take stern action against such erring members."

Pointing out that the petitioner had overstayed leave on false rounds, the Bench said the Supreme Court had held that the punishment imposed by a disciplinary authority should normally not be disturbed by High Court or a Tribunal except when the punishment is found to be "shockingly disproportionate."

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Stories in this Section

`Sigaram' awards presented
Arbitration processes should be faster, says former judge
Experts point out perils of urbanisation
Seafood - Eat healthy while enjoying variety
Defence Ministry yet to respond to AAI plea for land
Selecting a Table
"More grants needed to spur research"
Motorists' nightmare
Plea to postpone poll
Dismissal of constable upheld
Nepalese Maoist leader allowed to engage lawyer
Thanjavur-Tiruvarur gauge conversion behind schedule
Briefly

Copyright © 2005, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu