MAHARAJ SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PUNISHMENT of dismissal from service imposed on the appellant by the Disciplinary and Appellate Authorities, was upheld by the learned Single Judge. Against this order of learned Single Judge that the present action of filing appeal has been resorted to by the appellant.

(2.) CONTEXTUAL facts depict that a charge sheet was served on the appellant on February 18, 1993, under Rule 16 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1958 (in short `cca Rules'), while he was working as Constable under the Rajasthan Police Subordinate Service. The appellant filed reply to the charge sheet. Enquiry officer was appointed, who after due enquiry, sent enquiry report to the SP Kota City, who was Disciplinary Authority of the appellant. The Disciplinary Authority thereafter issued show cause notice to the appellant and passed order dated June 25, 1994 terminating his services and forfeiting the balance of salary payable to the appellant during period of suspension except subsistence allowance.

(3.) IN Union of INdia vs. B. C. Chaturvedi (1995) 6 SCC 750, the Apex Court propounded as under:- (Para 18) "the High Court/tribunal while exercising the power of judicial review cannot normally substitute its own conclusion on penalty and impose some other penalty. If the punishment imposed by the Disciplinary Authority or the Appellate Authority shocks the conscience of the High Court/tribunal it would appropriately mould the relief either directing the Disciplinary/appellate Authorities to reconsider the penalty imposed or to shorten the litigation, it may itself in exceptional and rare cases impose appropriate punishment with cogent reasons in support thereof. "