19 Sep 2001
Order issued
ConcludedThe Delhi High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.
Disciplinary action · Procedural only.
Source: 2002(63) DRJ 198
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2001-0016New Delhi, DelhiJudgment 19 September 2001
Ex. Constable Jal Singh vs Commissioner of Police and Others
The judgment of the Delhi High Court records the following account. Delhi Police constable Jal Singh remained unauthorisedly absent from 8 May 1991 to 26 July 1991 despite two absentee notices, and had 40 prior unauthorised absences on record. A departmental enquiry held the misconduct charge proved and he was dismissed on 17 July 1992; his departmental appeal and OA No.1529/93 before the Central Administrative Tribunal both failed. The court held that regularising the absence as leave without pay was only for maintaining a correct service record and did not obliterate the dismissal, following Harihar Gopal. It found no illegality in the dismissal, dismissed the Article 226 writ petition, and upheld the Tribunal order dated 14 July 1999. 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 19 September 2001, the Delhi High Court (Coram: Sharda Aggarwal, J.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against the Jal Singh (Constable).
- Register number
- DL 02 CW 0001
- Case reference
- 2002(63) DRJ 198
- Court and date
- Delhi High Court (Coram: Sharda Aggarwal, J.), 19 September 2001
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Jal 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)
- “we are of the opinion that the order dismissal of the petitioner does not suffer from any illegality” (at para 14)
- 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 19 September 2001 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.
“we are of the opinion that the order dismissal of the petitioner does not suffer from any illegality” (para 14)
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.