6 Nov 2015
Order issued
ConcludedThe Jharkhand High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.
Disciplinary action · Procedural only.
Source: (2016) 1 JLJR 45; (2016) 1 AJR 304
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2015-0035Dhanbad, JharkhandJudgment 6 November 2015
Dhanbad Police Constable vs The State of Jharkhand and Others
The Jharkhand High Court (Pramath Patnaik J.) on 6 November 2015 dismissed the writ petition of police Constable and upheld his dismissal from service. The court recorded that he dishonestly drew Rs. 11,630 as house rent allowance for March, September, October and November 2009 and January 2010 while retaining official accommodation at Dhanbad, and was dismissed after Departmental Proceeding No. 169 of 2010. The court held the enquiry was properly constituted, guilt rested on material on record, judicial review could not reappreciate evidence, and dismissal was not disproportionate. The dismissal, already affirmed in appeal and memorial, was consequently sustained.
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 →Detailed record
Report card
By judgment dated 6 November 2015 in W.P.(S) No. 5406 of 2012, the Jharkhand High Court (Coram: Pramath Patnaik, J.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against the Constable, Dhanbad Police, Computer/Confidential Section.
- Register number
- JH 10 CW 0007
- Case reference
- W.P.(S) No. 5406 of 2012 / (2016) 1 JLJR 45; (2016) 1 AJR 304
- Court and date
- Jharkhand High Court (Coram: Pramath Patnaik, J.), 6 November 2015
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Constable, Dhanbad Police, Computer/Confidential Section
- 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)
- “Admittedly, on the basis of allegations, charges has been framed and the enquiry has been conducted in which the petitioner has been found guilty by the enquiry officer.” (at para 7(I))
- 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.
Current position
The Jharkhand High Court judgment dated 6 November 2015 is the concluded position shown in the cited sources.
Evidence position
Recorded allegations
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.
Attributed to the court
What the court found
Holding not recorded separately.
“Admittedly, on the basis of allegations, charges has been framed and the enquiry has been conducted in which the petitioner has been found guilty by the enquiry officer.” (para 7(I))
Separate from verification
Institutional response
Continuing record
Follow-up history
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.