CONSTABLE DVR GARIBULLAH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule D.B. This writ petition can be disposed of in view of the submissions made before us by learned counsel for the parties. It is contended that the petitioner had unblemished record of 13 years and only for the charges which were framed against the petitioner, the services of the petitioner was terminated. The respondent framed the following articles of charges against the petitioner :-

(2.) On the aforesaid charges the disciplinary authority passed the impugned order on 1.11.1996. The disciplinary authority has discussed in its order in the following terms:-

(3.) An appeal was filed against the order passed by the disciplinary authority where the appellate authority recorded that charges in Article (i) and (ii) levelled against the petitioner were proved beyond any doubt. To our mind the finding of the appellate authority amounts to disagreeing with the findings of the disciplinary authority. The disciplinary authority had concluded on the basis of proceedings of the departmental inquiry and statement of witnesses that charge no.(i) was proved whereas charge no.(ii) was partially proved. We have seen from the record of the disciplinary authority that unlike the discussions on charge no.(i), no discussion have been made with regard to charge no.(ii) being held as partially proved. The observation of the appellate authority that charge nos. (i) and (ii) were fully proved, as a matter of fact, shows that there was complete non-application of mind by the appellate authority to the appeal of the petitioner. Supreme Court in Ranjit Thakur Vs. Union of India (1987) 4 SCC 611 has observed as under :-