The Punjab and Haryana High Court reiterate the circumstances for judicial review of disciplinary proceedings

The petitioner challenged the dismissal order issued to him by his employer for the acts of misconduct committed by him. He contended punishment to be disproportionate and further prayed for an alternate remedy of compulsory retirement. It was argued by the counsel for the petitioner that, the petitioner was dismissed following disciplinary proceedings on a minor charge of speaking loudly to a superior officer. The court observed that petitioner was subjected to 52 disciplinary proceedings including multiple instances of embezzlement, misbehavior, etc. Repeated violations suggest a pattern of behavior that posted a nuisance to the employer. Further, relying on the decision of Supreme Court in U.O.I v. P. Gunasekaran (2015) wherein the apex court had laid down that High Court cannot reappreciate the evidence or question the proportionality of punishment unless it is so disproportionate that it shocks the conscience of  the Court. Considering the evidence on record the court in this CWP -14078-2000 (O & M) held that the dismissal was justified based on the substantial evidence of repeated misconduct.