7 Apr 2000
Order issued
ConcludedThe Delhi High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.
Disciplinary action · Procedural only.
Source: 2000 (iv) AD (Delhi) 873
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2000-0013DelhiJudgment 7 April 2000
Deputy Commissioner of Police vs Jorawar Singh and Another
The Delhi High Court allowed the department's writ petition and restored the dismissal of Delhi Police constable Jorawar Singh, who had been dismissed on 29 April 1993 for habitual unauthorised absence after pleading guilty at the departmental enquiry. The Court held that the Supreme Court's decision in State of M.P. vs Harihar Gopal still held the field, that the two-Judge decision in Bakshish Singh was per incuriam on this point, and that treating the absence period as leave without pay was only for maintaining a correct service record and did not obliterate the dismissal. It found the termination suffered from no illegality, set aside the Central Administrative Tribunal's order dated 22 January 1999 which had quashed the dismissal, and made the Rule absolute. 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 7 April 2000 in C.W.P. No. 2611 of 1999, the Delhi High Court (Coram: R.S. Sodhi, J.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against the Jorawar Singh (Constable).
- Register number
- DL 00 CW 0007
- Case reference
- C.W.P. No. 2611 of 1999 / 2000 (iv) AD (Delhi) 873
- Court and date
- Delhi High Court (Coram: R.S. Sodhi, J.), 7 April 2000
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Jorawar Singh (Constable)
- Present service status
- Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked
- Article 226 of the Constitution of India
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “The order of the Tribunal dated 22nd January, 1999 in O.A. No. 901 of 1995 is set aside. The writ petition is allowed and the Rule made absolute.” (at para 17)
- 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 Delhi High Court judgment dated 7 April 2000 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.
“The order of the Tribunal dated 22nd January, 1999 in O.A. No. 901 of 1995 is set aside. The writ petition is allowed and the Rule made absolute.” (para 17)
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.