MEYTUSH CH SANGMA Vs. STATE OF MEGHALAYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. S.Kumar, learned counsel on behalf of the petitioner as well as Mr. H.Kharmih, learned State counsel on behalf of the respondents.

(2.) The petitioner's case in a nutshell is that:

(3.) Mr. S.Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that in this instant case, the charges against the petitioner was that during his duty hours, a UTP escaped from NEIGRIHMS lockup in the year 2013 and thereafter, a disciplinary proceeding was drawn against him in the year 2013 itself. A departmental proceeding was drawn against the petitioner and he was dismissed from service. The contention of the petitioner is that he was not given full opportunity to defend himself and besides that, his case was considered under the old Police Act called the Repealed Police Act, 1861.