RAM SARAN Vs. I G OF POLICE CRPF

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant calls in question legality of the judgment rendered by a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur, dismissing the writ petition filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950 (in short the Constitution).

(2.) Background facts in a nutshell are as follows :- The appellant applied for appointment as a Constable in Central Reserve Police Force (in short CRPF) and appeared for recruitment test on 1-5-1969. In support of his claim of age he produced a certificate where his date of birth was stated to be 1-1-1959. But in reality as was revealed later, his date of birth was 1-7-1951. Therefore, he was not eligible to be appointed as he was less than 18 years of age. He undisputedly rendered about 27 years of service. But on the basis of certain allegations he faced departmental inquiry. Article of charge reads as follows

(3.) The Deputy Commandant 45/BN. CRPF was appointed as Inquiry Officer to conduct the Departmental Enquiry. After enquiry the Inquiry Officer submitted the inquiry report. The Commandant (S.G.), the Disciplinary Authority after considering the report was of the view that the charge official deserves stringent punishment. But keeping in view his long service of 28 years with good grading for the past 10 years, he was inclined to take a lenient view and in purported exercise of power under Section 11(1) of the Central Reserve Police Force Act, 1949 (in short the Act) and Rule 27 of the Central Reserve Police Force Rules, 1955 (in short the Rules) imposed penalty of reduction to the rank of NK (GD) for a period of one year from 10-9-1997 to 9-9-1998 without cumulative effect. The matter was placed before the Deputy Inspector General of Police, C.R.P.F., Nagpur who by order dated 16-1-1998 differed from the proposed punishment and directed dismissal from service. Accordingly, notice was issued to the appellant. After considering the reply the punishment awarded was dismissal from service. The said order was challenged in appeal before the Departmental Appellate Authority which was dismissed. Thereafter, the writ petition was filed, which as noted above was dismissed.