Service Law

Dismissal

— Judicial review — Normally High Court in exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction under Art. 226 should not interfere with findings of enquiry officer and punishment of dismissal — Where charges of serious nature against respondent found by enquiry officer proved beyond doubt and on consideration of entire material the authorities concerned came to the conclusion that dismissal would meet the ends of justice, held, High Court erred in interfering with the order of dismissal on ground that acts complained of were sheer mistakes or errors on the part of respondent and for that no punishment could be attributed to respondent — High Court committed error of judgment in quashing the order of dismissal, modifying the punishment by way of stoppage of two increments with cumulative effect and granting the respondent reinstatement and continuity of service with all pecuniary and consequential service benefits — High Court's judgment was perverse, hence set aside and order of dismissal passed by disciplinary authority restored, (2006) 5 SCC 673