VIRENDRA SINGH Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Vijay Gautam, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Ms. Atipriya Gautam, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel.

(2.) Petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed by Senior Superintendent of Police, Bareilly, the disciplinary authority dtd. 3/6/2023 in a disciplinary proceeding, whereby, petitioner's integrity is directed to be withheld for one year.

(3.) It is argued on behalf of the petitioner that this punishment order which has been passed described as is not punishment as such under the order impugned but it is directed at the same time that it may be considered for the purpose of determination of satisfactory service. He submits that either in a disciplinary proceeding, disciplinary authority after due inquiry can either hold the petitioner guilty of the charges and impose punishment of any nature major or minor prescribed under the rules or shall absolve the petitioner from the charges. The disciplinary authority, it is argued, is not empowered to make out a third case to impose punishment which is not prescribed under the Rules.