I am terminated from service for mere misconduct committed in a hotel. The commandant has terminated me on the ground that my behaviour is prejudicial to good order and discipline. My colleague has given a party on the eve of superannuation in service of CRPF. In that party I mistakenly took my AK 47 rifle and fired in that hotel. A complaint was lodged by the supervisor of the hotel. That hotel is run by the welfare committee of CRPF and situated within the premises of the regiment. All were my friends and we were enjoying the party. For that mere misconduct the commandant has terminated me from the service. How to challenge the order?
Asked from: Maharashtra
Prima facie, it appears that you have committed grave misconduct. The act of firing a deadly weapon, such as an AK-47, at a private party demonstrates a clear lack of discipline. As an employee of a disciplined organization like the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF), you are obligated to uphold the highest standards of behavior and maintain the esteem of your organization.
Under Section 12 of the Central Reserve Police Force Act, 1949, the commandant has the discretion to dismiss an employee from service if it is determined that the act or conduct of the member is prejudicial to good order and discipline. This provision empowers the commandant to terminate a member of the force even for less heinous offenses.
In this instance, your actions are categorized as a less heinous offense because you were not on duty at the time of the incident. However, to preserve discipline within the force, termination of your service may still be deemed appropriate. If you believe that the punishment is excessively harsh or disproportionate to the offense, you have the option to file a writ petition in the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
The Supreme Court, in Union of India v. R.K. Sharma (2001) 9 SCC 592 and CRPF v. Surinder Kumar (2011) 10 SCC 244, has established that the mere disproportionate nature of a punishment is insufficient grounds to quash a termination order. For judicial interference to occur, the punishment must be so strikingly disproportionate as to constitute manifest injustice.
The Supreme Court has further clarified that intervention is justified only in extreme cases where the punishment order is evidently perverse or irrational. In your case, the department is likely to argue that maintaining discipline within the force and preventing the misuse of deadly weapons, such as the AK-47, justifies the termination of a member who has demonstrated casualness in handling such a weapon.
Based on the facts of your case, it seems unlikely that the High Court would find sufficient grounds to interfere with the punishment order. The department's emphasis on preserving discipline and preventing dangerous precedents appears to outweigh arguments regarding the proportionality of the punishment. Take a chance and file a writ petition you have been terminated from service for mere misconduct.
Also Read: Termination without notice
