https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283934 The High Court upheld the dismissal of the appellant's writ petition, emphasizing the availability of alternative remedies and the lack of jurisdictional errors warranting intervention under Article 226. The Court found that the Inspector General of Police had jurisdiction to dismiss the appellant, even though the dismissal order was not based on evidence personally recorded by the Inspector General. Additionally, the Court refrained from making observations on the legality of retrospective dismissal and suspension, noting that the appellant had the option to appeal to the Government for redress. en-us Thu, 13 Oct 1960 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 21 Oct 2019 18:13:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283934 The High Court upheld the dismissal of the appellant's writ petition, emphasizing the availability of alternative remedies and the lack of jurisdictional errors warranting intervention under Article 226. The Court found that the Inspector General of Police had jurisdiction to dismiss the appellant, even though the dismissal order was not based on evidence personally recorded by the Inspector General. Additionally, the Court refrained from making observations on the legality of retrospective dismissal and suspension, noting that the appellant had the option to appeal to the Government for redress. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 13 Oct 1960 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283934