https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173570 The Supreme Court upheld the penalty of removal from service imposed on the respondent for forcibly entering a school principal's office in a drunken state during duty hours. The Court emphasized the role of the Disciplinary Authority in determining penalties, the limited scope of judicial review based on the doctrine of proportionality, and the High Court's error in modifying the penalty. The Court reinstated the removal decision, stating that economic hardship is not a basis for judicial interference, and affirmed the disciplinary authority's discretion in imposing penalties. en-us Fri, 04 Oct 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 17 Sep 2015 13:01:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173570 The Supreme Court upheld the penalty of removal from service imposed on the respondent for forcibly entering a school principal's office in a drunken state during duty hours. The Court emphasized the role of the Disciplinary Authority in determining penalties, the limited scope of judicial review based on the doctrine of proportionality, and the High Court's error in modifying the penalty. The Court reinstated the removal decision, stating that economic hardship is not a basis for judicial interference, and affirmed the disciplinary authority's discretion in imposing penalties. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 04 Oct 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173570