4 Mar 2010
Order issued
ConcludedThe Delhi High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.
Disciplinary action · Procedural only.
Source: (2010) 03 DEL CK 0033
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2010-0022DelhiJudgment 4 March 2010
Delhi Police Head Constable vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Others
Head Constable of Delhi Police faced departmental proceedings for demanding and accepting Rs 45,000 as consideration for securing another person's appointment to a government job, and was dismissed from service on 24 October 2007. His departmental appeal was rejected in February 2008 and the Central Administrative Tribunal dismissed his challenge in February 2009. The Delhi High Court held he could not show a case of no evidence or violation of natural justice, noting evidence of guilt in abundance and his wife's undisputed return of Rs 17,000. It dismissed the writ petition, leaving the dismissal from service 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 4 March 2010 in W.P.(C) No. 1310/2010, the Delhi High Court (Coram: Mool Chand Garg, Anil Kumar, JJ.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against the Head Constable, Delhi Police.
- Register number
- DL 00 CW 0024
- Case reference
- W.P.(C) No. 1310/2010 / (2010) 03 DEL CK 0033
- Court and date
- Delhi High Court (Coram: Mool Chand Garg, Anil Kumar, JJ.), 4 March 2010
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Head Constable, Delhi Police
- Present service status
- Recorded in the cited sources as dismissed from service.
- Provisions invoked
- Rule 15(2) of the Delhi Police (Punishment & Appeal) Rules, 1980
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “For the foregoing reasons, we do not find any ground to interfere with the order of the Tribunal dated 12th February, 2009. There are no such illegalities or irregularities in the order of the Tribunal which will require interference by …” (at para 9)
- 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 4 March 2010 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.
“For the foregoing reasons, we do not find any ground to interfere with the order of the Tribunal dated 12th February, 2009. There are no such illegalities or irregularities in the order of the Tribunal which will require interference by …” (para 9)
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.