Bombay high court refuses to reinstate constable detained under MPDA Act

The high court was hearing a plea against a June 2013 Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal order.

The Bombay high court (HC) has refused to reinstate a police constable, who had been kept in preventive detention under the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities (MPDA) Act. The division bench of Acting Chief Justice VK Tahilramani and Justice MS Sonak took into consideration that the constable, Baburao Gopal Deshmukh, was not even in a position to deny most of the circumstances

The constable had been dismissed from service by an order dated October 31, 2002(Representational photo)

Deshmukh had been dismissed from service by an order dated October 31, 2002. “The charges against him relate to extracting money by threatening ordinary people and misusing his position as a police constable,” said the bench.

In June 2003, challenged the dismissal in front of the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal (MAT), which upheld his summary dismissal from service by invoking Article 311(2)(b).

He then approached the high court, challenging the MAT order, on the grounds that Article 311(2)(b) can be invoked only when it is not “reasonably practicable” to hold a departmental enquiry.

The order of dismissal did not mention why it was not “reasonably practicable” to hold an enquiry and the only reason stated was related to presuming his guilt, Deshmukh contended.

The bench, however, rejected the contention saying “the reasonable practicability of holding an inquiry is a matter of assessment to be made by the disciplinary authority, as such authority is generally on the spot and knows what is happening, and courts cannot sit in appeal over findings recorded by the disciplinary authority.”