https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463520 Departmental punishment was found unsustainable where the appellant and a similarly placed subordinate were treated differently in relation to the same incident, with the primary actor exonerated while the appellant was penalised. Such selective treatment was held unfair, arbitrary and unreasonable, contrary to the constitutional requirement that State action be fair, non-discriminatory and reasonable. The civil courts' concurrent refusal to interfere was also undermined because the High Court dismissed the second appeal without framing or considering the substantial questions of law raised. The punishment order and the affirming orders were set aside, and the challenge succeeded. en-us Thu, 01 May 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 05 Sep 2025 11:25:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463520 Departmental punishment was found unsustainable where the appellant and a similarly placed subordinate were treated differently in relation to the same incident, with the primary actor exonerated while the appellant was penalised. Such selective treatment was held unfair, arbitrary and unreasonable, contrary to the constitutional requirement that State action be fair, non-discriminatory and reasonable. The civil courts' concurrent refusal to interfere was also undermined because the High Court dismissed the second appeal without framing or considering the substantial questions of law raised. The punishment order and the affirming orders were set aside, and the challenge succeeded. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 01 May 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463520