Madras HC orders ‘whistleblower’ cop’s reinstatement after 23 yrs
The disciplinary authority dismissed him from the service on the charge of misconduct. He was later removed from the service as it was proved that he wrote several anonymous letters to an inspector stating that the policemen were treated as bonded labourers, creating shame on the department.
Madras High Court (File)
CHENNAI: Holding that a humane and logical approach is required to regulate the disciplinary aspects of the police force, the Madras High Court (MHC) directed the State to reinstate a grade two police constable into the service who was removed from service 23 years ago for writing an anonymous letter out of frustration.
A division bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice C Kumarappan wrote that despite the charges against the appellant held proved, this Court considering the quantum of punishment imposed on the proved charges seems to be excess while allowing an appeal moved by the constable removed from the service.
In 1998, M Balachandran, the appellant, worked as a constable at Coimbatore. The disciplinary authority dismissed him from the service on the charge of misconduct. He was later removed from the service as it was proved that he wrote several anonymous letters to an inspector stating that the policemen were treated as bonded labourers, creating shame on the department.
Challenging his removal, Balachandran moved to the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal. In 2007, the matter was transferred to the High Court.
After hearing the case, the single judge held that the matter involves discipline and, therefore, the punishment of removal from service is as per the service rules. Aggrieved by the order, Balachandran moved an appeal.
There is no doubt that writing anonymous letters by policemen is misconduct. The HC bench opined that removing Balachandran from service was harsh since the letters were written out of frustration.
Since the appellant accepted his misconduct before the disciplinary authority, a lenient view should be taken regarding the quantum of punishment imposed, wrote the bench.
The Court also directed the State to initiate corrective measures to maintain high discipline in the police force.
The bench clarified that the appellant is entitled to continuity of service only for the limited purpose of reckoning the qualifying services and for pensionary benefits. He cannot claim back wages and monetary benefits; read the judgment.
