8 Feb 2012
Order issued
ConcludedThe Calcutta High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.
Disciplinary action · Procedural only.
Source: W.P.S.T. No. 21 of 2012
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2012-0025Kolkata, West BengalJudgment 8 February 2012
Calcutta Police Constable v. State of West Bengal & Ors.
Calcutta Police constable had at least 31 punishments, mostly for habitual unauthorised absence, before a disciplinary proceeding found him guilty and recommended dismissal. His departmental appeal was dismissed as time-barred with no explanation for delay, and the West Bengal Administrative Tribunal held the punishment not disproportionate given his past conduct. The Calcutta High Court noted he had remained absent throughout the proceedings without cooperating and endorsed the Tribunal's proportionality view. The writ application was dismissed on 8 February 2012 with no order as to costs. 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 8 February 2012 in W.P.S.T. No. 21 of 2012, the Calcutta High Court (Coram: Subhro Kamal Mukherjee, Nishita Mhatre, JJ.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against the Constable, Calcutta Police.
- Register number
- WB 01 CW 0005
- Case reference
- W.P.S.T. No. 21 of 2012
- Court and date
- Calcutta High Court (Coram: Subhro Kamal Mukherjee, Nishita Mhatre, JJ.), 8 February 2012
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Constable, Calcutta Police
- Present service status
- Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked
- Regulation of Calcutta 1968 Chap 19 Reg 11 of the Police Regulations
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “We find no merit in the writ application and the same, thus, stands dismissed without any order as to costs.” (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 Calcutta High Court judgment dated 8 February 2012 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 find no merit in the writ application and the same, thus, stands dismissed without any order as to costs.” (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.