Prem Ram vs State of Uttarakhand and Others

Umesh Chandra Dhyani, J.�Instant appeal has been preferred assailing the judgment/order dated 15.09.2014 passed by learned single Judge of this Court, whereby Writ Petition No. 1239 (S/S) of 2011, filed by the petitioner (appellant herein) was dismissed. Brief facts of the case, as narrated in the writ petition, are that the petitioner was working as constable in Uttarakhand Civil Police. On 01.11.2006, while on patrol duty at Berinag town, the petitioner was found in an inebriated state, fighting with members of public in a market place. Medical examination was conducted on the same day, whereby the petitioner was tested positive for alcohol. On 01.12.2006, petitioner was again apprehended in an intoxicated state while breaking window-panes of the barrack at the police station, Berinag. He was again tested positive for alcohol in his medical examination. Charge-sheet was submitted and two charges were framed against the petitioner. Both the charges were found proved against the petitioner. Consequently, punishment for dismissal from service was awarded to the petitioner. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner filed statutory appeal, which too was dismissed. Feeling further aggrieved, the petitioner approached this Court by way of filing a writ petition, which too was dismissed. Hence this appeal.

We have heard Mr. R.C. Tamta, learned counsel for the petitioner/appellant and Mr. P.C. Bisht, learned Standing Counsel for the State.

It was observed in the impugned order that the charges found proved against the petitioner were serious in nature. Police force is a disciplined force and the petitioner by his act has lowered the prestige of the police force in the eyes of the public. Learned single Judge further observed that the punishment awarded is in proportion to the proved misconduct of the petitioner.

The settled position of law is that while awarding punishment, past conduct of the delinquent employee, ordinarily, should not be taken into consideration and misconduct in question only should be taken into consideration for the purpose of awarding the punishment.

Since, petitioner has completed 25 years'' satisfactory service in the police department and the punishment awarded to him is major punishment, therefore, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case in hand, punishment of dismissal from service seems to be excessive. Consequently, appeal is allowed. Impugned judgment/order is hereby set-aside. The Writ Petition stands allowed and the order of dismissal of the petitioner from service is converted into compulsory retirement. No order as to costs.