ARUNESH CHAND MANKOTIA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In April, 2002 the petitioner was selected and joined OTA, Chennai as a gentleman Cadet in the Short Service Commission 75. The petitioner claims to have performed very well in his first term of the academy training on the basis of which he was promoted to the second term and was also given the appointment of Company Sergeant Major. Somewhere in December, 2002 the petitioner was given some ATM Cards by Capt Amitabh. Without the knowledge of the petitioner, a sum of Rs.12,000/- was withdrawn from the bank account from the stolen ATM cards. The petitioner was asked to deposit entire amount of Rs.12,000/- in the account of that gentleman Cadet in the IDBI Bank under threat. Despite this, the Court of Inquiry was conducted and the petitioner was not granted any opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses. Based on the findings of the Court of Inquiry, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner on 10.1.03. The petitioner's father was informed about petitioner's withdrawal from the Academy and was asked to deposit the training charges. On 13.1.03, the petitioner was withdrawn from the Academy and given movement order after the petitioner had deposited the cost of the training. Thereafter, the petitioner took up a civil job in a private firm and again applied for OTA course as he was still keen to join the Army. In February, 2004 the petitioner was again selected for SSB, Bhopal. On 10.4.04 the petitioner joined OTA Chennai. On 30.4.04 the petitioner was issued a show cause notice stating that he was not eligible to join OTA. The petitioner submitted his reply. However, no action was taken on this show cause notice. Again, on 11.6.04 the petitioner was issued fresh show cause notice and petitioner was withdrawn from training after he had done two and a half months training and was asked to deposit charges for two and a half months. Being aggrieved from the arbitrary action of the respondents, the petitioner served a legal notice on the respondents through his counsel on 22.8.04. In spite of sending legal notice, the grievance of the petitioner was not redressed resulting in filing of the present writ petition.

(2.) In the present writ petition, the petitioner prays that the order dated 13.1.03 and 18.6.04 respectively withdrawing the petitioner from OTA and directing him to deposit the training costs be quashed. He also prays that his original certificates be ordered to be returned to him and the respondents be directed to pay compensation for mental and physical harassment caused by the respondents to the petitioner.

(3.) According to the respondents, the factum of selection of the petitioner as a gentleman Cadet has not been disputed, however, it is stated that on 6.12.02 the Cadet was found using unfair means, where he was intentionally misusing the credit cards of Lt.Manu Awasthi, to withdraw money from an ATM in the city while he had proceeded on out pass. After conducting a Court of Inquiry in accordance with rules, he was found at fault and vide letter dated 10.1.03 the father of the Cadet, Lt.Col.R.C.Mankotia was informed of his withdrawal from the Academy. Even the father had accepted the offence of his son and had willingly paid the cost of training prior to his son's withdrawal from the Academy. Approval of withdrawal was accorded by the Army Headquarters vide their letter dated 24.4.03. However, the petitioner subsequently joined the Academy on 9.4.04 for SSC-79 course through NCC Special Entry Scheme. On 11.4.04 he was identified as a Cadet who was earlier withdrawn on disciplinary grounds from the Academy. The matter was referred to Recruitment Directorate, Army Headquarters on 12.4.04 itself. After receiving the appropriate information subsequently on 3.6.04 the Cadet's verification Form IAFF(P)-14 was received from the Recruitment Directorate vide their letter dated 28.5.04 on scrutiny of which it was found that he had falsified the information of his previous withdrawal in para 12(1) of the form based on which the action was again initiated and show cause notice dated 12.6.04 for furnishing falsified information was served upon the petitioner. The Academy then initiated a case for his withdrawal in accordance with the existing rules (Para 33 of the Joining Instructions issued to the cadet and Para 68(e) of Administrative Instructions issued vide letter dated 29.4.04). Vide letter dated 18.6.04 the petitioner was sent back to his home pending approval his withdrawal from higher authorities. The approval was granted vide letter dated 24.9.04. In view of these facts, it is stated that earlier he had withdrawn a sum of Rs.12,000/- fraudulently by use of ATM cards of another officer and subsequently had made a false declaration in the form and as such the action of the respondents in withdrawing the petitioner from the Academy is fully justified. The respondents vide their letter dated 24.9.04 have communicated to the petitioner that he has been withdrawn from the Academy and has to pay a sum of Rs.26,262/- as training charges.