VIGILANCE MANUAL VOLUME III - AP Online

DECISION -116
355
Bhagwat Parshad vs. Inspector General of Police,
AIR 1970 P&H 81
The petitioner, a Police Constable, was found drunk when
he was off duty and was dismissed from service as a result of
disciplinary proceedings. The punishment was challenged as being
too severe and disproportionate to the misconduct on the ground
that it was a solitary instance of the petitioner having taken intoxicating
drinks.
The Punjab & Haryana High Court dismissed the petition
with the following observations: “Misconduct is a generic term and
means to conduct amiss, to mismanage; wrong or improper conduct;
bad behaviour; unlawful behaviour or conduct. It includes
malfeasence, misdemeanour, delinquency and offence. The term
misconduct does not necessarily imply corruption or criminal
intent....... human conduct or behaviour cannot be graded and there
can be no precise scale of graduation in order to arithmetically
compare the gravity of one from the other.” The High Court added:
“As observed by the Supreme Court in State of Orissa vs. Vidya
Bhushan, AIR 1963 SC 779 (786), the court, in a case in which an
order of dismissal of a public servant is impugned, is not concerned to
decide whether the sentence imposed, provided it is justified by the
rules, is appropriate having regard to the gravity of the misdemeanour
established. The reasons which induced the punishing authority, if
there has been an inquiry consistent with the prescribed rules, are not
justiciable; nor is the penalty open to review by the Court.”
(116)
Inquiring authority — reconstitution of Board
Reconstitution of Board of Enquiry by replacing one
of the members does not vitiate the enquiry.
General Manager, Eastern Rly. vs. Jawala Prosad Singh,
1970 SLR SC 25