MUKESH GURJAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, an Ex Sub-Inspector (Executive) in the respondents Central Industrial Security Force (CISF), has filed this petition impugning the punishment order dated 26th March, 2016 of his removal from service, appellate order dated 28th June, 2016, revisional order dated 28th February, 2017 and the order dated 9th April, 2019 passed by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) and seeking reinstatement in service, with all consequential benefits.

(2.) It is the case of the petitioner, that (i) he joined the respondents CISF as a Constable (General Duty) on 6th September, 2008 and on clearing the Limited Departmental Competitive Examination (LDCE), was appointed as Sub-Inspector (Executive) in the respondents CISF on 9th August, 2013; (iii) the petitioner, on 22nd June, 2015 was posted from Chhindwara, Madhya Pradesh to Bhilai, Chhattisgarh; (iv) the petitioner, to bring his family from Chhindwara to Bhilai, applied for and was sanctioned leave from 20th July, 2015 to 23rd July, 2015; 19th July, 2015 was a Sunday and 18th July, 2015 was a gazetted holiday; the petitioner also took compensatory leave for 24th and 25th July, 2015; (v) "that while the petitioner was on his way to bring his family, he stayed at Pooja Lodge, Parasia Road, Chhindwara (M.P.) on 18.07.2015"; (vi) on 20th July, 2015, the petitioner was arrested in a "false case" of FIR No.412/2015 under Section 376(2)(c) and (f)/506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and Sections 3(2)(v) and 3(1)(w) of the Scheduled Castes and Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (SC&ST Act); (vii) vide order dated 20th July, 2015 the petitioner was placed under suspension; (viii) on 6th August, 2015, the petitioner was released on bail by the Sessions Court, Chhindwara, Madhya Pradesh; (ix) on 8th August, 2015, the petitioner rejoined his duties at Bhilai; (x) on 9th August, 2015, the petitioner was served with a chargesheet proposing to hold an enquiry against him, on the charges of (a) having in a pre-planned manner booked a hotel at Chhindwara and of having been arrested and a newspaper report in this regard having been published in the local newspapers of 20th / 21st July, 2015, which tarnished the image of the CISF; (b) having, at the time of booking the hotel, produced the unauthorized I-Card for the post of Constable; and, (c) criminal case of rape having been lodged against the petitioner and which was unbecoming of the position of a member of a disciplinary force like CISF; (xi) the petitioner submitted his reply dated 19th August, 2015 to the chargesheet, denying all the charges; (xii) on 26th September, 2015, the petitioner made a representation, pointing out certain illegalities in the departmental proceedings being conducted against him and seeking rejection of the Inquiry or conduct of the same in a free and fair manner; (xiii) the manager of Pooja Lodge, Chhindwara, the complainant in the criminal case and her husband were examined in the departmental inquiry; the manager of Pooja Lodge, Chhindwara categorically stated that no such incident of rape had taken place in the hotel and the complainant and her husband also did not attribute anything to the petitioner; (xiv) during the recording of the statement of the witnesses, the conduct of the Inquiry Officer was in flagrant violation of fair procedure; (xv) the petitioner, on 10th December, 2015 again represented, seeking change of Inquiry Officer; (xvi) the doctor who had post FIR examined the complainant, in her deposition before the criminal court stated that she did not find any external or internal injury on the person of the complainant; (xvii) the learned Special Judge, SC&ST Act, vide order / judgment dated 1st February, 2016 acquitted the petitioner from all charges; (xviii) the Inquiry Officer, ignoring the judgment of the criminal court, submitted his report dated 4th February, 2016 holding the charges to be proved; (xix) the Disciplinary Authority, considering the acquittal of the petitioner in the criminal case, vide order dated 5th February, 2016 revoked the suspension of the petitioner; (xx) the petitioner submitted a reply to the inquiry report but the Disciplinary Authority, vide order dated 26th March, 2016 imposed penalty of removal from service on the petitioner; (xxi) the appeal and thereafter the revision petition preferred by the petitioner were rejected / dismissed on 28th June, 2016 and on 28th February, 2017 respectively; (xxii) the petitioner moved a review petition dated 16th May, 2017 under Section 9(3) of the Central Industrial Security Force Act,1968 and Chapter XI of the Central Industrial Security Force Rules, 2001 to the Government of India; (xxiii) the petitioner, on 15th March, 2018, 3 rd April, 2018, 6th September, 2018, 1st October, 2018 and 20th November, 2018 was informed that his review petition / representation was pending consideration; and, (xxiv) the petitioner, vide letter dated 9th April, 2019 was informed that his review petition had been rejected.

(3.) This petition filed in or about September, 2020 i.e. after one and a half years of the rejection of the review petition and more than four years from the date when the petitioner was removed from service, has come up today for the first time, for admission. There is no explanation for the delay. There is also no explanation why the petitioner, when the disposal of the review petition was being unduly delayed, did not approach the Court. Such delays are not expected from a person out of service, by now, for over four years. The only inference is that the petitioner is well settled outside his career with the respondents CISF.