8 Jul 2015
Order issued
ConcludedThe Rajasthan High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.
Disciplinary action · Procedural only.
Source: (2015) 07 RAJ CK 0195
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2015-0027RajasthanJudgment 8 July 2015
Rajasthan Police Constable vs State of Rajasthan and Others
[name withheld], a Rajasthan Police constable appointed in 1981, was charge-sheeted for unauthorised absence from duty from 14 September 1989 to 15 March 1991 and dismissed after enquiry on 28 December 1991; his departmental appeal and review were also rejected. He challenged the dismissal in a writ petition contending procedural lapses, illness, and disproportionate punishment. The Rajasthan High Court (Jaipur Bench) held there was adequate material supporting the findings and that writ-court interference is confined to cases of no material or gross illegality. The court held that absence without leave in a disciplined force like the police must be viewed seriously, and dismissed the petition, upholding the dismissal. 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 July 2015 in Civil Writ Petition No. 6189 of 1998, the Rajasthan High Court (Coram: Anupinder Singh Grewal, J.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against the Constable, Rajasthan Police.
- Register number
- RJ 00 CW 0007
- Case reference
- Civil Writ Petition No. 6189 of 1998 / (2015) 07 RAJ CK 0195
- Court and date
- Rajasthan High Court (Coram: Anupinder Singh Grewal, J.), 8 July 2015
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Constable, Rajasthan Police
- Present service status
- Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked
- Rule 16 of the Rajasthan CCA Rules, 1958
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “Tested in the light of the aforementioned principles of law, the dismissal of the petitioner, who was a Police Constable and had been absent without leave for a period of 547 days, cannot in any manner be said to be …” (at para 18)
- 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 8 July 2015 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.
“Tested in the light of the aforementioned principles of law, the dismissal of the petitioner, who was a Police Constable and had been absent without leave for a period of 547 days, cannot in any manner be said to be …” (para 18)
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.