S.L.NARSAIAH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of the impugned orders dated 28.07.1998 (Annexure P/46 & P/51) whereby the appeals of the petitioner against the order dated 22.05.1998 (Annexure P/44 & P/49) issued by the Commandant, Central Industrial Security Force (for short 'the CISF') Unit Bhilai. Under order dated whereunder the petitioner was imposed with a punishment of removal from service.

(2.) THE facts, in brief, as projected by the petitioner are that the petitioner was a member of CISF, posted as Lance Nayak in Bhilai Unit at Dalli Rajhara Mines. The petitioner was allotted official accommodation which was later on cancelled on 22.08.1997 (Annexure P/1) on the ground that he was not residing in that quarter alongwith his family. Against the said cancellation order, the petitioner preferred a representation on 27.08.1997 (Annexure P/2) requesting the authorities to permit him to retain the quarter. The respondent authorities directed the petitioner by letter dated 29.08.1997 (Annexure P/3) to vacate the said quarter in response to which the petitioner submitted his explanation on30.08.1997 (Annexure P/4) stating that his family has arrived at Rajhara and they are staying with him. The petitioner was asked to report to the Orderly Room for indiscipline on 18.09.1997 (Annexure P/6) and on 19.09.1997 (Annexure P/7), the petitioner was placed under suspension.

(3.) SHRI Tamaskar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was never served with second show cause notice before imposition of the final order of dismissal from service. The absence of the petitioner was on account of urgent domestic need, thus, remaining absent without prior intimation would not come within the definition of indiscipline. The petitioner resided in the official accommodation without his family for a very short period, thus, it cannot be said that he has committed any misconduct. He would further submit that under Section 8 of the Central Industrial Security Force Act, 1968 (for short 'the Act'), removal of a member of a force has been made subject to Article 311 of the Constitution and also subject to Rule 34 of the Rules, 1969. He would next contend that the Commandant, CISF was having no authority to remove the petitioner from service.