New Delhi: The Supreme Court said on Tuesday that driving under the influence of alcohol, a truck carrying provincial-armed guidance personnel (PAC) was a very serious violation and non-tolerable indiscipline and it was also in the military disciplined.
The bench consisting of Judges M and B V Nagaratha said only because there was no big loss and it was a small accident that could not be the basis for showing reduction.
“It’s good to succeed that the accident is not a fatal accident.
It can be a fatal accident.
When employees drive a truck carrying PAC personnel, the life of PAC personnel traveling in the truck is in it.
The driver’s hand.
Therefore, it can be said that he plays With the life of the PAC personnel, who served and traveled from Fatehpur to Allahabad with Kumbh Mela’s duties, “Bench said.
The APEX court heard the appeal submitted by the PAC driver (since died) challenging the command of dismissal which was passed by the disciplinary authority that had made him guilty because it caused an accident under the influence of alcohol.
The top field further said that even the opposite, driving a vehicle under the influence of alcohol is not only a violation but also a violation.
“Nothing can be permitted to drive a vehicle under the influence of alcohol.
A violation encourages vehicles under the influence of alcohol and playing with the lives of others is a very serious violation.
There is also another violation committed by employees.” Said the bench.
It was said to consider the statement of employees that he had consumed liquor after an accident with the aim of pressing fear, the dismissal sentence could be said to be too hard and can be treated for mandatory retirement.
“Given the things above and for reasons stated hereibove and in the strange facts and the circumstances of the case, the dismissal sentence award can be said too hard, the dismissal sentence is directed to be converted into a required retirement.
The employee who has died Law and given the dismissal punishment has now been converted into a mandatory pension.
Appeal is currently partially allowed at a certain extent, “Bench said.