CW-2013-0020Jorhat, AssamJudgment 4 February 2013

Union of India and Others vs CISF Constable

The judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High Court records the following account. CISF Constable of the ONGC Jorhat unit faced three charges that on 22 September 2001, under the influence of liquor, he created a nuisance in the Jorhat mess abusing a head constable and constable, insulted two inspectors by throwing his cap, belt and shirt at them, and obstructed duty. A detailed departmental enquiry found the charges proved and he was dismissed from service on 15 January 2002, but a single judge set aside the dismissal and ordered reinstatement without back wages. The Division Bench held judicial review could not reappreciate the evidence, that off-duty conduct with a nexus to employment constitutes misconduct, and that dismissal was not harsh for a member of an armed force. The Court set aside the single judge's order and affirmed the dismissal. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.

Externally reportedV2
What this record means

This page documents a court-adjudicated case from the judgment and cited sources below. Findings are attributed to the court; this record does not add findings of its own.

How verification works →

Report card

By judgment dated 4 February 2013 in Writ Appeal No. 763 of 2007, the Madhya Pradesh High Court (Coram: Sujoy Paul, Sheel Nagu, JJ.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against the Constable, CISF Unit, ONGC Jorhat.

Register number
AS 03 CW 0001
Case reference
Writ Appeal No. 763 of 2007 / (2013) ILR (MP) 542; (2013) 2 JLJ 15; (2013) LabIC 3453; (2013) 2 MPHT 393; (2013) 3 MPLJ 378; (2013) 02 MP CK 0114
Court and date
Madhya Pradesh High Court (Coram: Sujoy Paul, Sheel Nagu, JJ.), 4 February 2013
Officer(s) at the material time
Constable, CISF Unit, ONGC Jorhat
Present service status
Recorded in the cited sources as dismissed from service.
Provisions invoked
Not stated in the cited sources
Finding of the Court (extract)
“It is accordingly set aside. The punishment inflicted by the employer is affirmed. Appeal is allowed.” (at para 13)
Verdict, sentence and quantum
Disciplinary action upheld. Sentence: dismissal.
Present status of the proceedings
No further proceedings are recorded in the cited sources; the judgment is the concluded position shown.

Compiled from the judgment and the cited sources. Findings are those of the court; this card adds none of its own.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court judgment dated 4 February 2013 is the concluded position shown in the cited sources.

Recorded allegations

1
OtherPrimary
Material fact supported

Reliable material supports a specifically documented fact relevant to that allegation, not necessarily the full allegation, causation, intent, unlawfulness, or responsibility.

Official finding: supports allegation.

What the court found

Holding not recorded separately.

“It is accordingly set aside. The punishment inflicted by the employer is affirmed. Appeal is allowed.” (para 13)

Institutional response

1
4 Feb 2013

Order issued

Concluded
Madhya Pradesh High Court External · Binding

The Madhya Pradesh High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.

Disciplinary action · Procedural only.
Source: (2013) ILR (MP) 542; (2013) 2 JLJ 15; (2013) LabIC 3453; (2013) 2 MPHT 393; (2013) 3 MPLJ 378; (2013) 02 MP CK 0114
Not yet re-checked.

Follow-up history

1
19 Sep 2026

(Round-8 full re-verification: published record re-checked against the judgment text (outcome, officers, quote, key facts) plus methodology-compliance pass; skills-guided adversarial re-verification of the published record against the judgment text (reverify/t1-*/adversarial-8.jsonl))

Corrections (0): No corrections recorded.

Review: Solo Staff combined review (one combined attestation) — not yet recorded.

Keep exploring

These records are listed together because they share a state or a topic. That does not mean they are connected.