Gravest misconduct under police discipline rules can justify dismissal for a single serious act, despite long service and pension prospects.

A police officer's heavy drinking while on duty, while armed with a service revolver, together with drunken roaming in public and abuse of a medical officer, was treated as gravest misconduct under Rule 16.2(1). The rule was read to permit dismissal for a single act of serious delinquency, because "acts" is not confined to repeated misconduct. The separate reference to continued misconduct, incorrigibility, and pensionary considerations was treated as an independent limb and not as a limitation on the power to dismiss for grave misconduct. Long service and prospective pension did not require a lesser penalty where discipline in a disciplined force was seriously breached.

---

---

Issues: Whether a police gunman's heavy drinking while on duty, coupled with roaming with his service revolver and abusing the medical officer, amounted to the gravest misconduct under Rule 16.2(1) so as to justify dismissal, and whether the length of service and pensionary prospects required a lesser punishment.

Analysis: Misconduct in a disciplined force is judged by the nature of the duty, the context, and the effect on discipline. Rule 16.2(1) authorises dismissal for the gravest acts of misconduct, and the expression "acts" is not confined to plural misconducts; a single act may be sufficiently grave. The rule's second limb, relating to continued misconduct, incorrigibility, and pensionary considerations, operates independently and does not qualify the first limb. Heavy drinking while on duty by a police officer carrying a service revolver, remaining in a drunken state in public, and abusing a medical officer displayed serious delinquency and breach of discipline.

Conclusion: The conduct constituted gravest misconduct within Rule 16.2(1), and dismissal was justified notwithstanding the respondent's long service and prospective pension.

---