https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311558 Pre-Constitution disciplinary procedure under the Tribunal Rules was treated as continuing under Article 313 so far as consistent with the Constitution, and the Governor's power to dismiss a police officer was held not to be displaced by the Police Act or subordinate regulations. The majority also held that selecting the Tribunal Rules before the Constitution did not retrospectively offend Article 14, because the procedure was substantially similar to the Police Regulations and afforded reasonable opportunity, including notice, cross-examination, defence evidence, and representation on punishment. The dissent considered the absence of an appeal under the Tribunal Rules, where the Police Regulations provided one, to be substantial unequal treatment under Article 14. en-us Mon, 06 Mar 1961 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 02 Jan 2024 15:26:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311558 Pre-Constitution disciplinary procedure under the Tribunal Rules was treated as continuing under Article 313 so far as consistent with the Constitution, and the Governor's power to dismiss a police officer was held not to be displaced by the Police Act or subordinate regulations. The majority also held that selecting the Tribunal Rules before the Constitution did not retrospectively offend Article 14, because the procedure was substantially similar to the Police Regulations and afforded reasonable opportunity, including notice, cross-examination, defence evidence, and representation on punishment. The dissent considered the absence of an appeal under the Tribunal Rules, where the Police Regulations provided one, to be substantial unequal treatment under Article 14. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 06 Mar 1961 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311558