Attorney General v Ling How Doong

CourtFederal Court (Singapore)
JudgeChua F A J
Judgment Date23 January 1969
Neutral Citation[1969] SGFC 1
Citation[1969] SGFC 1
Docket NumberCivil Appeal No Y42 of 1968
Subject MatterNatural justice,Commission hearing appeal from decision of disciplinary board of the Police – Whether Commission empowered to enhance punishment given by disciplinary board,Public service commission,Public Service Commission hearing appeal from decision of disciplinary board of the Police Public Service,Administrative Law,Commission considering enhancing punishment – Whether right to know enhancement under consideration and be heard on question of enhancement
Date23 January 1969
Defendant CounselJB Jeyaretnam(JB Jeyaretnam & Co)
Published date19 September 2003
Plaintiff CounselHo Thian Cheh (Senior State Counsel)

The respondent Ling How Doong was an inspector in the Singapore Police Force. On 23 February 1966 a letter or dismissal was addressed to him by the Commissioner of Police in the following terms:

23 February 1966

Inspector Ling How Doong,

Police Training School.

Through: AC `Training & Personnel`.


Assistant Commissioner,

`Training & Personnel`

Commandant, Police Training


I have to refer to your letter of 5 November 1965 forwarding your grounds of appeal against the finding and punishment imposed by the Commissioner of Police.

2. Your appeal had been submitted for the consideration of the Public Service Commission. The Public Service Commission after consideration of your appeal has decided that you should be dismissed from the service.

3. This letter then is to serve as a notice to you of your dismissal from the service. Your dismissal from the service will take effect from the day immediately following that on which you receive this notice. Your last day of service will therefore be the day you receive this notice.

4. Please acknowledge receipt of this letter on the attached duplicate copy thereof.

(Sd J Le Cain)

Commissioner of Police,


The facts and circumstances which resulted in Inspector Ling`s dismissal from the Singapore Police Force by the Public Service Commission were as follows:

On 14 June 1965 four charges under s 27 of the Police Force Ordinance were preferred against Inspector Ling. In accordance with reg 8 of the Police Regulations, 1959 which were made under the Police Force Ordinance 1958 (No 32 of 1958) a board consisting of two officers senior in rank to Inspector Ling was duly appointed to conduct a disciplinary enquiry into these four charges. One charge alleged that Inspector Ling was guilty of the offence of conduct to the prejudice of good order and discipline, another charge alleged that he was guilty of the offence of neglect of orders and the remaining two charges alleged that he was guilty of the offence of excess of duty resulting in injury to two persons.

These offences were punishable under s 28(1) by dismissal or retirement from the Police Force, or by any of the following punishments:

(i) reduction in seniority;

(ii) deferment or stoppage of increment;

(iii) reprimand;

(iv) caution,

and in lieu of or in addition to any other punishment by a fine not exceeding two hundred dollars.

In due course the board conducted a disciplinary enquiry in accordance with the procedure laid down in the said Police Regulations 1959. During the course of the enquiry two of the four charges were amended by the board and after the conclusion of the enquiry the board on 8 September 1965 found Inspector Ling guilty on the two amended charges (i) of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • Lee Keng Kee v Attorney General
    • Singapore
    • High Court (Singapore)
    • 25 November 1980
    ...J B Jeyaretnam (J B Jeyaretnam) for the plaintiff Chao Hick Tin (Attorney-General's Chambers) for the defendant. AG v Ling How Doong [1968-1970] SLR (R) 375; [1969-1971] SLR 42 (refd) Jacob v AG [1968-1970] SLR (R) 694; [1969-1971] SLR 364 (distd) Ling How Doong v AG [1968-1970] SLR (R) 262......
  • Sithambaran v Attorney General
    • Singapore
    • High Court (Singapore)
    • 12 August 1972
    ...(J B Jeyaretnam & Co) for the plaintiff Warren Khoo Leang Huat (State Counsel) for the Attorney-General. AG v Ling How Doong [1968-1970] SLR (R) 375; [1969-1971] SLR 42 (distd) Enderby Town Football Club v Football Association [1971] Ch 591; [1971] 1 All ER 215 (folld) Government of the Fed......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT