The Rajasthan High Court quashed the dismissal order of a police constable who had been terminated from service following a departmental proceeding based on the outcome of a preliminary enquiry. The Court held that the disciplinary action taken against the constable was not sustainable because the preliminary enquiry conducted by the senior police officers was fundamentally flawed and did not meet the requirements of fairness and procedural propriety. The dispute arose from allegations of misconduct against the constable, which led to the initiation of a departmental proceeding and ultimately to an order of dismissal.
The constable challenged his dismissal before the High Court, contending that the departmental process was vitiated by serious procedural irregularities that prejudiced his right to a fair hearing. He argued that the preliminary enquiry report, which formed the basis of the subsequent disciplinary proceeding and dismissal, was prepared without affording him a proper opportunity to present his defence and that it lacked adherence to the requisite norms governing such enquiries. The Court examined the record of the preliminary enquiry and noted that it failed to satisfy elementary standards of fairness, including the absence of meaningful participation by the constable in the enquiry process and the failure to record and consider his explanations adequately.
In analysing the legality of the disciplinary action, the Rajasthan High Court emphasised that a preliminary enquiry is an essential step in departmental proceedings and must be conducted with due regard to principles of natural justice. The Court observed that the enquiry officer must independently evaluate the evidence, record findings supported by material, and provide an opportunity to the charged official to respond to allegations. In the present case, the enquiry report was found to be perfunctory, with conclusions drawn without adequate examination of relevant facts or consideration of the constable’s explanations. The absence of a proper hearing and evaluation rendered the enquiry report unreliable as a basis for initiating punitive action.
The High Court further noted that reliance on a flawed preliminary enquiry compromised the integrity of the entire disciplinary process. It held that disciplinary proceedings must be based on credible and trustworthy evidence and that the mere existence of allegations cannot justify severe punitive measures such as dismissal without a fair and transparent inquiry. The principles of natural justice require that an employee facing allegations must be given a reasonable opportunity to know the case against him, present evidence, and seek clarification on adverse materials relied upon by the enquiry officer.
Given the procedural deficiencies in the enquiry report and the consequent prejudice to the constable’s defence, the High Court quashed the order of dismissal. The judgment underscored that departmental authorities must adhere to prescribed procedures and ensure that enquiries are conducted independently, impartially, and with strict compliance with principles of fairness. The Court’s decision reflects judicial insistence on procedural regularity in disciplinary matters, particularly where the outcome has serious consequences for an individual’s career and livelihood.
By setting aside the dismissal order, the Rajasthan High Court reaffirmed that disciplinary action cannot be sustained when based on enquiry processes that are perfunctory or fail to provide a fair opportunity to the person concerned. The constable’s reinstatement or further appropriate relief will depend on subsequent proceedings in accordance with law, ensuring that any disciplinary action taken in future is founded on a proper and fair investigation.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.