17 Feb 2009
Order issued
ConcludedThe Rajasthan High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.
Disciplinary action · Procedural only.
Source: S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 416/2009
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2009-0020RajasthanJudgment 17 February 2009
Rajasthan Woman vs State of Rajasthan & Ors.
The judgment of the Rajasthan High Court records the following account. The widow of police Constable, appointed in February 1976, sought quashing of his removal from service for habitual wilful absence and release of retiral benefits and family pension. The inquiry officer had found the absence charges proved, the disciplinary authority removed him in March 1993 and again in January 1996 after an appellate remand, and her review before the Governor filed in July 2007 was dismissed as time-barred. The court found he was a habitual absentee who repeatedly absented without leave, held the prescribed inquiry procedure was followed and a writ court cannot set aside a well-reasoned disciplinary order on sympathy, and held the punishment was not disproportionate. It dismissed the writ petition, leaving the removal and denial of retiral benefits intact. 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 17 February 2009 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 416/2009, the Rajasthan High Court (Coram: H.R. Panwar, J.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against the Constable, Rajasthan Police.
- Register number
- RJ 00 CW 0003
- Case reference
- S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 416/2009
- Court and date
- Rajasthan High Court (Coram: H.R. Panwar, J.), 17 February 2009
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Constable, Rajasthan Police
- Present service status
- Recorded in the cited sources as removed from service.
- Provisions invoked
- Rule 16 of the Rajasthan CCA Rules, 1958; Article 226 of the Constitution of India
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “In the instant case, it is evident from the inquiry report that the husband of the petitioner being police constable, an employee of the respondent Police Department in Uniform repeatedly remained absent without leave voluntarily.” (at para n/a)
- 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 Rajasthan High Court judgment dated 17 February 2009 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.
“In the instant case, it is evident from the inquiry report that the husband of the petitioner being police constable, an employee of the respondent Police Department in Uniform repeatedly remained absent without leave voluntarily.” (para n/a)
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.