SUNIL KUMAR Vs. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has laid a challenge to an order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal dated 29th July, 2015 by which the O.A. filed by the petitioner herein stands dismissed.

(2.) Brief facts necessary for deciding the present petition are that the petitioner was appointed as a Constable with Delhi Police on 15th July, 1996. He was promoted to the post of Head Constable on 30th March, 2008. Post his marriage, an FIR was registered against him on 31st August, 2009 under Sections 498-A/406/34 IPC. Simultaneously, a departmental inquiry was also initiated against the petitioner on 25th February, 2011. The respondent No.1 issued orders against the petitioner for punishment of forfeiture of four years approved service permanently by order dated 7th November, 2012. An appeal preferred by the petitioner against the aforesaid order was rejected by the respondents on 18th September, 2013, which led to the filing of the O.A. before the Central Administrative Tribunal which was dismissed by the Tribunal by an order dated 29th July, 2015 which is impugned in the present writ petition.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the inquiry was conducted as per the Delhi Police (Punishment & Appeal) Rules, 1980. He submits that the Inquiry Officer was conscious of the rights of the petitioner, had not declined the request of the petitioner to cross-examine the witnesses, but the Inquiry Officer overlooked the fact that despite the witnesses after their examination-in-chief were called for their cross-examination, they did not appear for their crossexamination. Since the petitioner was deprived of his legitimate right to crossexamine the witnesses who had deposed, the enquiry proceedings would stand vitiated.