Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Shri Gunaji K. Govekar, was appointed as a Police Constable in 1990 and confirmed in 1994. On 04.04.2000, while posted at Thana, Cortalim Police Outpost, a mob of approximately 100 to 250 armed persons attacked the outpost. The petitioner was on duty but allegedly remained absent during the attack. Disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him under the Police Subordinate Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1975. The inquiry officer, Superintendent of Police (North), submitted a report dated 18.04.2013 finding the petitioner guilty of dereliction of duty. The Chief Secretary, by order dated 17.07.2013 under Rule 19A of the Rules, dismissed the petitioner from service. The petitioner challenged these orders by way of a writ petition. The court considered the facts, the inquiry proceedings, and the arguments of both sides. The court found that the inquiry was conducted fairly, the petitioner was given adequate opportunity to defend himself, and the findings were based on evidence. The court also held that the punishment of dismissal was not disproportionate to the misconduct, as a police constable's absence during a mob attack is a serious dereliction of duty affecting public safety. The petition was dismissed.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Disciplinary Proceedings - Dereliction of Duty - Police Constable - The petitioner, a police constable, was dismissed from service for remaining absent from duty during a mob attack on the police outpost. The court examined whether the inquiry was conducted fairly and whether the punishment was proportionate. Held that the inquiry was proper and the punishment of dismissal was not disproportionate given the serious nature of the misconduct (Paras 1-34). B) Service Law - Natural Justice - Inquiry Officer's Report - The petitioner alleged that the inquiry officer's report was biased and that he was not given a fair opportunity to defend himself. The court found that the inquiry was conducted in accordance with the rules and the petitioner was given adequate opportunity to cross-examine witnesses and present his defense (Paras 10-20). C) Service Law - Proportionality of Punishment - Dismissal - The petitioner argued that the punishment of dismissal was too harsh. The court held that the misconduct of a police constable remaining absent during a mob attack strikes at the root of discipline and public safety, and therefore dismissal was proportionate (Paras 25-30).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the findings of the inquiry officer and the order of dismissal passed against the petitioner are sustainable in law and whether the punishment of dismissal is proportionate to the misconduct of remaining absent during a mob attack.
Final Decision
The petition is dismissed. The findings of the inquiry officer and the order of dismissal are upheld.
Law Points
- Disciplinary proceedings
- dereliction of duty
- police constable
- mob attack
- absence from duty
- natural justice
- proportionality of punishment
- Police Subordinate Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules
- 1975
