news details |
|
|
| HC upholds CRPF man's dismissal for 'terrorizing superiors' with service weapon | | | Early Times Report
Srinagar, Jan 19: Observing that the CRPF is highly disciplined force and any act of misconduct or dereliction of duty is viewed very seriously by it, the state High Court has upheld the paramilitary force's decision to dismiss one of its personnel for "terrorizing, threatening" his seniors with service weapon nearly two decades ago. The petitioner Nisar Ahmad had challenged the Order of dismissal whereby he has been dismissed from the services of the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) with effect from 4th June 1999. "It is within the domain of the employer to decide about the appropriate punishment that can be awarded to the delinquent in the proved facts and circumstances. This depends on the facts and circumstances of each case as also nature of the service, the delinquent is engaged in. The CRPF is highly disciplined force and any act of misconduct or dereliction of duty is viewed very seriously," said a bench of Justice Sanjeev Kumar. "There is no scope in such a disciplined force to let go a delinquent who is found to have used his service weapon to terrorise and threaten his superiors. The opened defiance and disobedience of the command of the superiors in the forces, like CRPF, is not something that can be ignored," the court added. The Disciplinary Authority taking note of all these aspects in its wisdom has found penalty of dismissal adequate punishment to be awarded to the petitioner, the court said. "This is not within the province of this Court to look into this aspect, more so when in the given facts and circumstances this Court does not find it to be a case of imposition of penalty shockingly disproportionate to the misconduct proved during the departmental inquiry."
The reliance of the petitioner on the judgement of the Division Bench of the Court in the case of Mohd. Naseer Naik v. Union of India, 2015 is also misplaced, the bench said.
"The judgement in the aforesaid case is clearly distinguishable and is rendered on its own facts," the court said dismissed Nisar's petition as without any merit and accordingly dismissed it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
