S.P. Singh Constable 851310656 Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

- motor vehicles act, 1988[c.a.no.59/1988] section 166; [a.k. patnaik, cj, a.k. gohil & s. samvatsar, jj] application for compensation for personal injury death of injured claimant subsequently for some other reasons held, claim for personal injury will abate on the death of claimant. claim will not survive to his legal representative except as regards claim for pecuniary loss to estate of claimant. - 2. the petitioner, thereafter, preferred appeal and also revision before the competent authority and i find that the penalty awarded by the disciplinary authority was confirmed by the appellate authority as well as by the revisional authority after considering the case of the petitioner.amareshwar sahay, j.1. heard the parties.the petitioner, who is a cisf constable, was departmentally proceeded for the following charges:1. that he created an ugly scene by shouting with filthy language in from of his superiors and also assaulted adi/exe namely r. stalin.2. that he attempted to snatch the service riffle of constable surender singh, who was on duty with an intention to kill the ch?m hc/gd s.p. sekharan and other cisf officers present there on the spot.the disciplinary authority found that the charges against the petitioner were partially proved and, there by, penalty was imposed of reduction of pay by two stages for a period of two years with cumulative effect.2. the petitioner, thereafter, preferred appeal and also revision before the competent authority and i find that the penalty awarded by the disciplinary authority was confirmed by the appellate authority as well as by the revisional authority after considering the case of the petitioner.3. the c.i.s.f. is a disciplined force and, therefore, the members of the force are required to maintain strict discipline. in my view, the punishment awarded to the petitioner was commensurate to the charges proved against him. nothing has been brought to my notice about any illegality or irregularity in the departmental proceeding or in the orders passed by the concerned authorities as contained in the impugned annexure.4. considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in my view, no case at all is made out by any interference by this court in its writ jurisdiction. accordingly, having found no merit, this writ application is dismissed.