In the case of Ravi Yashwant Bhoir v. District Collector, Raigad & ors. - (2012) 4 SCC 407 the Hon'ble Apex Court has particularly observed in paragraph 12 that the word "misconduct" , though not capable of precise definition, gets its meaning from the context, the degree of deviance and its effect on the discipline and the nature of the duty. These observations extracted from paragraph 12 which have been quoted from P.
Ramanatha Aiyar's Law Lexicon, Reprint Edn. 1987 p. 821, are reproduced thus :
"12. .... Thus, it could be seen that the word 'misconduct' though not capable of precise definition, on reflection receives its connotation from the context, the delinquency in its performance and its effect on the discipline and the nature of the duty. It may involve moral turpitude, it must be improper or wrong behaviour;
unlawful behaviour, wilful in character; forbidden act, a transgression of established and definite rule of action or code of conduct but not mere error of judgment, carelessness or negligence in performance of the duty; the act complained of bears forbidden quality of character. Its ambit has to be construed with reference to the subject-matter and the context wherein the term occurs, regard being had to the scope of the statute and the public purpose it seeks to serve ....."
"{See also State of Punjab v. Ram Singh2 }"
{2(1992) 4 SCC 54} It is clear from these observations that the expression "misconduct" has to be understood in the context of the facts and circumstances of each case and whether a particular act would amount to misconduct or not would depend upon its context, intensity of the deviance, nature of the delinquency and its over all effect on the discipline of the institution and also the nature of duty during the performance of which the alleged misconduct has occurred.{ para 49}
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Rahul S/O. Virendra Deshmukh And ... vs State Of Maharashtra Thr. ... on 6 May, 2016
Bench: S.B. Shukre
No comments:
Post a Comment