1995 (11) TMI 379 - SUPREME COURT

Whether the order dismissing the appellant from service is invalid in law for non-supply of the inquiry report?

Whether the charge of being in possession of assets disproportionate to his known source of income is a misconduct?

Whether the delay in initiating disciplinary proceeding is an unfair procedure depriving the livelihood of a public servant offending Article 14 or 21 of the Constitution?

Whether the inquiry was held by a competent officer?

Held that:- The availability of appeal etc. to public servants does not make a real difference, as the appellate/revisional authority is known to have taken a different view on the question of sentence only rarely. I would, therefore, think that but for the self-imposed limitation while exercising power under Article 226 of the Constitution, there is no inherent reason to disallow application of judicial mind to the question of proportionately of punishment/penalty. But then, while seized with this question as a writ court interference is permissible only when the punishment/penalty is shockingly disproportionate.