Dismissed for 4yrs, cop to get all pay & perks lost: HC | Mumbai News

Mumbai: In a relief for a policeman years after he was dismissed while in training and was out of service for nearly four years, Bombay high court ordered the state govt to pay him full pay and allowances for that period within four months.“The period from Dec 27, 2010 to Oct 28, 2014, shall be treated as a period spent on duty for all purposes,” Justices Makarand Karnik and Nitin Borkar directed on July 1.On Aug 30, 2010, there was an altercation between Vinodsingh Chavan and batchmate Sachin Gaikwad at the police training centre, Marol, Andheri (E). As Gaikwad was allegedly abused in filthy language, he assaulted Chavan with a wooden log, fracturing his left hand. However, a departmental inquiry found Chavan guilty of misconduct and dismissed him from service on Dec 27, 2010. His appeal was dismissed. On his revision plea, the state set aside his dismissal, and punished him by withholding increments for five years with cumulative effect. On Oct 18, 2014, Chavan was reinstated in service.On Chavan’s representation against the withholding of five increments and for full pay and allowances for the time he was out of service, the state granted only 50% pay and allowance for three years prior to reinstatement. In Jun 2023, Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal declined to interfere. He approached HC.Chavan’s advocate, Shivani Shinde, relied upon a Mar 2013 Supreme Court judgment on maintaining parity among co-delinquents. She argued that the punishment given to her client was highly disproportionate. Gaikwad was equally responsible for the alleged incident. While Gaikwad was also subjected to an inquiry, a minor punishment of recovery of one month’s pay was imposed upon him. Shinde said that the state had erred in denying full pay and allowances during the period Chavan was out of service. The judges perused the inquiry report. “We find that co-delinquent police constable Sachin Gaikwad was equally responsible for the incident dated Aug 30, 2010,” Justice Borkar wrote for the bench. The judges noted that a minor punishment of recovery of one month’s pay was imposed upon Gaikwad, “even though he assaulted Chavan with a wooden log, fracturing his left hand.”Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and the SC judgment, the judges set aside MAT’s order, modified Chavan’s punishment to be similar to that imposed on Gaikwad. Considering the nature of misconduct, the judges said “ends of justice would be met” by directing the respondents to pay full pay and allowances to Chavan for the period he was out of service.Mumbai: In a relief for a policeman years after he was dismissed while in training and was out of service for nearly four years, Bombay high court ordered the state govt to pay him full pay and allowances for that period within four months.“The period from Dec 27, 2010 to Oct 28, 2014, shall be treated as a period spent on duty for all purposes,” Justices Makarand Karnik and Nitin Borkar directed on July 1.On Aug 30, 2010, there was an altercation between Vinodsingh Chavan and batchmate Sachin Gaikwad at the police training centre, Marol, Andheri (E). As Gaikwad was allegedly abused in filthy language, he assaulted Chavan with a wooden log, fracturing his left hand. However, a departmental inquiry found Chavan guilty of misconduct and dismissed him from service on Dec 27, 2010. His appeal was dismissed. On his revision plea, the state set aside his dismissal, and punished him by withholding increments for five years with cumulative effect. On Oct 18, 2014, Chavan was reinstated in service.On Chavan’s representation against the withholding of five increments and for full pay and allowances for the time he was out of service, the state granted only 50% pay and allowance for three years prior to reinstatement. In Jun 2023, Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal declined to interfere. He approached HC.Chavan’s advocate, Shivani Shinde, relied upon a Mar 2013 Supreme Court judgment on maintaining parity among co-delinquents. She argued that the punishment given to her client was highly disproportionate. Gaikwad was equally responsible for the alleged incident. While Gaikwad was also subjected to an inquiry, a minor punishment of recovery of one month’s pay was imposed upon him. Shinde said that the state had erred in denying full pay and allowances during the period Chavan was out of service. The judges perused the inquiry report. “We find that co-delinquent police constable Sachin Gaikwad was equally responsible for the incident dated Aug 30, 2010,” Justice Borkar wrote for the bench. The judges noted that a minor punishment of recovery of one month’s pay was imposed upon Gaikwad, “even though he assaulted Chavan with a wooden log, fracturing his left hand.”Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and the SC judgment, the judges set aside MAT’s order, modified Chavan’s punishment to be similar to that imposed on Gaikwad. Considering the nature of misconduct, the judges said “ends of justice would be met” by directing the respondents to pay full pay and allowances to Chavan for the period he was out of service.