RAJPAL SINGH Vs. UOI AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has sought a writ of certiorari, for quashing the order dated 6th December, 2001 passed by the respondent, CRPF whereunder it was held that the charges framed against him under Article - I and II, for failing to join his duties without any valid permission/ sanction of any kind of leave and for failing to join his duties upon being relieved on 12th June, 1999 on transfer and continuing to remain absent, were fully proved and accepting the advice of the UPSC, the penalty of compulsory retirement with 30% cut in pension on a permanent basis under Rule 40 of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 was imposed upon him. Further, the petitioner's unauthorized absence from duty w.e.f. 13th June, 1999, till 1st June, 2000 (for 355 days) was treated as dies non.

(2.) On 23rd February, 2016, a twofold argument had been raised by learned counsel for the petitioner and recorded as below: -

(3.) Ms. Barkha Babbar, learned counsel for the respondents, had sought time to examine the plea taken by the other side and the case was adjourned for today. Today, learned counsel questions the right of the petitioner to advance the second argument noted above on the ground that the petitioner had failed to take any such plea in his representation submitted to the disciplinary authority and nor had such a plea been taken in the grounds raised in the writ petition to assail the impugned order.