4 May 2021
Order issued
ConcludedThe Uttarakhand High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.
Disciplinary action · Procedural only.
Source: Writ Petition (S/S) No. 1289 of 2015
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2021-0005Champawat, UttarakhandJudgment 4 May 2021
Purnagiri Police Constable v. State of Uttarakhand and Others
The Uttarakhand High Court dismissed Constable's writ petition, upholding his termination from service on 18 November 2013. The Court recorded that while on Purnagiri Mela duty on 17 April 2013 he was found intoxicated and misbehaving with tourists, and thereafter remained absent without leave from 18 April to 1 May 2013. It noted a departmental inquiry had proved both charges and his departmental appeal had been dismissed in March 2014. The Court held the acts constituted gross misconduct for a police constable, noted his past warnings and punishments, and found the punishment not disproportionate. 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 →Detailed record
Report card
By judgment dated 4 May 2021 in Writ Petition (S/S) No. 1289 of 2015, the Uttarakhand High Court (Coram: Ravindra Maithani, J.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against the Constable, Purnagiri Mela duty / Police Line Almora.
- Register number
- UK 03 CW 0002
- Case reference
- Writ Petition (S/S) No. 1289 of 2015
- Court and date
- Uttarakhand High Court (Coram: Ravindra Maithani, J.), 4 May 2021
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Constable, Purnagiri Mela duty / Police Line Almora
- Present service status
- Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked
- Not stated in the cited sources
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “Having considered all these facts, this Court is of the view that the punishment as imposed upon the petitioner is not disproportionate. There is no merit in this writ petition and it deserves to be dismissed.” (at para 30)
- 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 Uttarakhand High Court judgment dated 4 May 2021 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.
“Having considered all these facts, this Court is of the view that the punishment as imposed upon the petitioner is not disproportionate. There is no merit in this writ petition and it deserves to be dismissed.” (para 30)
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.