<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2013 (7) TMI 1232 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457224</link>
    <description>Proved indiscipline in service disciplinary proceedings may be judicially reviewed where the punishment is grossly disproportionate and shocks the conscience. Applying proportionality, the Court noted that the misconduct was blameworthy but did not involve manhandling or justify forfeiture of past service, so dismissal from service was excessive. At the same time, the false allegation against the superior officer was treated seriously, so complete leniency was not warranted. The Court substituted the penalty with reduction to the rank of constable, ordered continuity of service, and denied back wages and other financial benefits for the intervening period.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 Jul 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 12 Sep 2024 14:51:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=767741" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (7) TMI 1232 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457224</link>
      <description>Proved indiscipline in service disciplinary proceedings may be judicially reviewed where the punishment is grossly disproportionate and shocks the conscience. Applying proportionality, the Court noted that the misconduct was blameworthy but did not involve manhandling or justify forfeiture of past service, so dismissal from service was excessive. At the same time, the false allegation against the superior officer was treated seriously, so complete leniency was not warranted. The Court substituted the penalty with reduction to the rank of constable, ordered continuity of service, and denied back wages and other financial benefits for the intervening period.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 Jul 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457224</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>