GO stopping increment to DSP quashed
GO stopping increment to DSP quashed
CHENNAI: The order dated December 3, 2008 of the State Home Secretary imposing a punishment of stoppage of increment for one year ..

CHENNAI: The order dated December 3, 2008 of the State Home Secretary imposing a punishment of stoppage of increment for one year without cumulative effect on C Kanagaraj, DSP, attached to the Economic Offence Wing-II in Nagercoil, has been set aside by the Madras High Court.Justice KN Basha, who quashed the order, also directed the authorities concerned to give notional promotion to Kanagaraj, if he was otherwise eligible and qualified, to the post of Additional Superintendent of Police with all attendant and monetary benefits. The exercise should be executed within 12 weeks, the jduge added.The judge was allowing two writ petitions from Kanagaraj, who was recruited as SI in 1976, promoted as inspector in 1989. He was again promoted to the position of DSP, in 2003.He was served with a charge-memo dated May 10, 1993, while working as inspector attached to the CB CID in The Nilgiris. The charge against him was that he had kept a person in illegal custody at a police station in Cumbum for two days in February, 1991. The second charge was that he tortured the detenue. Kanagaraj offered his explanation.However, the disciplinary authority imposed the punishment in February, 2002. He took up the matter with the Appellate Authority, the IG of Police (Crime Branch), Chennai, who by an order dated June 12, 2002 set aside the order of punishment.However, by the order dated December 3, 2008, the Home Secretary imposed the punishment again. Petitioner’s consel Abudu Kumar contended that there was an inordinate and unexplained delay of more than six years in passing the order from the date of setting aside the order of the disciplinary authority. Hence, the entire proceedings were vitiated. The Home Secretary could not inflict the punishment by suo-motu proceedings without assigning any reason, Kumar added.Accepting the submissions of Kumar, the judge set aside the punishment order and gave the direction to promote the petitioner.

What's your reaction?

Comments

https://popochek.com/assets/images/user-avatar-s.jpg

0 comment

Write the first comment for this!