VIGILANCE MANUAL VOLUME III - AP Online

DECISION - 438
837
as on duty from the date of suspension till the date of the acquittal for
purpose of computation of pensionary benefits etc. The appellant is
also not entitled to any other consequential benefits.
(438)
Penalty — quantum of
Imposition of penalty is the right of disciplinary
authority and the Tribunal has no power to direct to
reconsider the matter.
Government of Andhra Pradesh vs. B. Ashok Kumar,
1997(2) SLJ SC 238
The respondent, an Inspector of Police, was placed before
the Tribunal for Disciplinary Proceedings on the charge of demanding
and accepting Rs. 3,000/- as illegal gratification for refraining from
registering a complaint and prosecuting him. The Tribunal held the
charge as proved but recommended to impose the penalty of
stoppage of three increments with cumulative effect. The Government
however dismissed him from service on 28-7-95. On the Application
having been filed before it the Administrative Tribunal, while accepting
that the charge has been proved, was of the view that the Government
should reconsider the question of imposition of the penalty of stoppage
of three increments.
The Supreme Court held that it is a legal settled position that
imposition of the penalty is the right of the disciplinary authority
consistent with the magnitude and the misconduct imputed and the
evidence in support thereof. The Inspector of Police, a higher ranking
officer, if he demands and accepts illegal gratification and restrains
himself from initiating prosecution against the offender, it would have
an effect on the maintenance of law and order in the society. The
Tribunal has no power to direct the appellant to reconsider the matter.