1 CGHC010199312020 2026:CGHC:31309 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3898 of 2020 Ishwar Toppo, S/o. Late Shri B.R. Toppo, Aged About 49 Years, R/o. Simga, Police Station Simga, District - Balodabazar Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh, Through - The Secretary, Department Of Police Of Chhattisgarh, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralay, New Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Director General Of Police, Head Office Of Police Of Chhattisgarh, Civil Lines, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Inspector General Of Police, Raipur Range, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Superintendent Of Police, Balodabazar, District - Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Ajay Kumar Chandra, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Amit Buxy, Dy. Govt. Advocate ASHOK SAHU Digitally signed by ASHOK SAHU Date: 2026.07.23 17:20:58 +0530 2 (Single Bench) Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 22.07.2026 1. This writ petition is directed against the impugned order dated 19.03.2020 passed by the Director General of Police dismissing the appeal of the petitioner affirming the order dated 17.05.2019 by which the Inspector General of Police has imposed penalty of stoppage of one increment with cumulative effect. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that in light of the decision rendered by this Court in WPS No.6060 of 2017, the Inspector General of Police cannot impose penalty and therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside. 3. Learned State counsel would support the impugned order and submit that the petition is liable to be dismissed. 4. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties, perused the pleadings and the documents appended thereto. 5. Admittedly, it is not in dispute that the petitioner was subjected to departmental proceedings for his misconduct resulting to penalty of stoppage of one increment with cumulative effect on future increments and pensions etc. vide order dated 17.05.2019 passed by the disciplinary authority (Inspector General of Police) exercising 3 its power conferred under Regulation 223(c) read with Regulation 214(ii) of the Regulations against which the petitioner was preferred an appeal which was dismissed by the Director General of Police by affirming the order passed by the disciplinary authority. 6. At this stage, it would be appropriate to notice Regulation 223 of the Regulations which provides the power to the Zonal Inspector General of Police or any Police officer equivalent to the rank of Inspector general of Police by which he can impose punishment, states as under:- “[223. Power of the Zonal Inspector of Police or any Police officer equivalent to the rank of Inspector general of Police. - The Zonal Inspector General of Police or any Police officer equivalent to the rank of Inspector General of Police to exercising the following powers:- (a) xxxxx (b) xxxxx (c) Power to inflict on all ranks from Constables to Inspector any of the penalties specified in Regulation 214 & 215.]” 7. The punishments to be imposed to the Sub-Inspectors and Assistant Sub-Inspectors has been defined in Regulation 214 of the Chhattisgarh Police Regulations which states as under :- 4 “214 Punishment-Kinds of.- Without prejudice to the provisions of any law or any special orders for the time being in force, the following penalties may, for good and sufficient reasons, be imposed upon any member holding a post in a Subordinate Police Service:- (i) xxxxx (ii) Withholding of increments of pay including stoppage at an efficiency bar or stagnation allowance;” 8. Regulation 214 of the Chhattisgarh Police Regulations prescribes various minor/major punishments which can be imposed without prejudice to the provisions of any law or any special order for the time being in force. 9. On perusal of the aforesaid provisions, by virtue of Regulation 223(c) of the Regulations, the Inspector General of Police has power to inflict on all ranks from Constables to Inspector any of the penalties specified in Regulation 214 and 215. The Regulation 214(ii) of the Regulations empowers the Inspector General of Police to withholding of increments of pay including stoppage at an efficiency bar or stagnation allowance. However, a careful perusal of the said Regulation would show that no power has been conferred with the Inspector General of Police to inflict a punishment of withholding an increment with cumulative effect, 5 which is also apparent from the memo dated 10.10.2008 issued by the Director General of Police, which states as under:- पुलिस मुख्या या, छत्तीसगढ़ लिसवि  ईन्स, रा यापुरा 492001 पुलिस विर्देश क0-04 क्रमु क-पुमु/प्रश /विजां च/1273/08 रा यापुरा, दिर्दे क 10/10/2008 प्रति , समुस् पुलिस इक ईया # छत्तीसगढ़ विषया- % &लि' सचया रूपु स% रा)क% क वियामु विरू' आर्दे%श जां रा+  करा% बा बा -। कई प्रकराणों # मु# अश सविक अति1क रिराया # द्वा रा विभा गया जां च मु# आरा)पु प्रमु णिणों पु ए जां % पुरा अपुच रा+ पुलिस अति1क रिराया # क% विरू' " एक % &लि' सचस रूपु स% रा)क% क र्देड" या " एक % &लि' एक ष8 क% लिए रा)क% जां % क र्देड णिजांसक प्रभा  सचया हो)ग " अति1रा)विपु विकए गया% हो:, जां) वियामु क;  हो< हो:। क& पुया इस सबा1 मु# छत्तीसगढ़ पुलिस रा%ग्या;० क% पु:रा 214 क अ)क हो) णिजांसमु# इस प्रक रा क% र्देड क प्र 1  हो< हो:। च;?विक पुलिस रा%ग्या;० क% पु:रा 221 क% अ ग8 पुलिस अ1क्षक क) इस प्रक रा क र्देड अति1रा)विपु करा% क अति1क रा हो< हो:, इस क राणों मु या छत्तीसगढ़ उच्च न्या या या द्वा रा कई बा रा इस प्रक रा क% र्देड र्दे%श अपु स् विकए गए हो:। इस सबा1 मु# मु या उच्च मु न्या या या द्वा रा भा मु०प्र० श स ए अन्या विरु' रा ति1क प्रस र्दे दुबा% ( दिर्दे क 25 अप्र: 1994) मु# उपुरा)क् स रा र्देण्ड र्दे%श अपु स् विकया गया हो:। अ G भाविष्या मु# अश सविक अति1क रा+ उपुरा)क् वियामु # क% अरूपु क या8 हो करा सविश्चिJ करा#। सहो/- (विश्वराजां) पुलिस मुहो विर्दे%शक 10. As such, it is quite evident that the Inspector General of Police has no power and jurisdiction to impose a punishment of stoppage of one increment with cumulative effect on future increments and 6 pensions etc. Accordingly the impugned order dated 17.05.2019 (Annexure P/1) as well as appellate order dated 19.03.2020 (Annexure P/2) are liable to be and are hereby set aside. However, the penalty so imposed is modified and it is directed that the petitioner is imposed with a penalty of stoppage of one increment with non-cumulative effect. 11. In view of the above, the writ petition is allowed to the above extent. No cost(s). Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Ashok