SUSHMA Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HARISH Kumar, original Petitioner (hereinafter referred to as 'Petitioner ' for convenience sake), filed the present petition, however, during the pendency of the petition, he died on 24.6.2009. Present Petitioners, legal heirs of deceased Harish Kumar, were permitted to be brought on record, as Petitioners, vide order dated 21.12.2010.

(2.) DISCIPLINARY proceedings were initiated against the Petitioner and the preliminary inquiry was conducted by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Rampur. Regular inquiry was assigned to Deputy Superintendent of Police, Theog. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Theog conducted the inquiry and concluded that both the charges levelled against the Petitioner stood proved. Thereafter, Disciplinary Authority, issued a show cause notice to the Petitioner why the penalty of removal be not imposed upon him. He filed reply to the same. The Disciplinary Authority on 4.1.1996 imposed penalty of forfeiture of two years ' service with permanent effect for the purpose of future increments. He preferred an appeal before the Deputy Inspector General of Police (Southern Zone). He reduced the penalty of two years forfeiture of service to one year with permanent effect. Petitioner further preferred an appeal before the Director General of Police. He rejected the same on 24.9.2001.

(3.) MR . Anshul Bansal, learned Additional Advocate General has supported the imposition of penalty. He has argued that the inquiry report is based on correct appreciation of evidence led by the Department as well as Petitioner. He has further argued that the penalty imposed upon the Petitioner is not disproportionate to the alleged misconduct.