BALKAR SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge in this writ petition is, to the order dated Dec. 7, 2011 whereby the petitioner was dismissed from service on the ground that holding a regular departmental inquiry by serving charge memorandum and following the due procedure in the manner prescribed in Rule 36 of CISF Rules, 2001 ('Rules of 2001' in short) is not practically possible and to the order dated March 14, 2014, whereby his representation was rejected.

(2.) Some of the brief facts are, the petitioner was appointed as a Constable in Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) on June 16, 2000. After completion of training at RTC Sidhabari, he was posted at CISF unit, NALCO, Angul with effect from May 01, 2001 and thereafter with effect from Nov. 1, 2004 at Ranchi; from May 31, 2007 at BIOP DEP-5; from March 1, 2008 at SSG Greater Noida, from Oct. 17, 2009 at CISF 6th Reserved Battallion, Deoli and with effect from Nov. 1, 2010 at STPP Simhadri till the first impugned order dated Dec. 7, 2011 was passed. It is his case that while working at NTPC Unit, Simhadri, he received a movement order dated Oct. 21, 2011 whereby he was directed to proceed on temporary duty to CISF Headquarters, New Delhi on Oct. 24, 2011. At the CISF Headquarters, the petitioner was asked by IG and DIG about his Facebook account and he truthfully told them as to how he joined the site and also told them that he neither did nor he could have disclosed any kind of information. It is also the case of the petitioner that as per the directions of the IG, the petitioner signed a written statement under duress and was not given a copy of his statement despite his request. After his return to the Unit, the petitioner was shocked to receive an order dated Dec. 7, 2011, whereby he was informed that since he has involved himself in chatting on a social networking site namely Facebook with a person whose identity has been established by very reliable sources, to be a person of neighbouring country and working as an under cover agent of that country and he is alleged to have exchanged information with that person, which is inimical to the interest of the organisation and adverse to the overall public interest and therefore, he was being dismissed from service, since the respondent No.3 was of the opinion, it was not practicably possible to hold a regular departmental inquiry.

(3.) It is the case of the petitioner in the pleadings, so also argued by Ms. Rekha Palli, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner that the dismissal of the petitioner after 11 years of an outstanding service on the ground that he had involved himself in chatting on social networking site namely "Facebook" with a person whose identity has been established by very reliable sources, to be a person of the neighbouring country and working as an under cover agent for that country and had exchanged information with that person, which is inimical to the interest of the organisation and adverse to the overall public interest, is clearly untenable. She states, that the petitioner who was part of the 140 member U.N. Peacekeeping Mission at Haiti from Oct. 17, 2009 to Oct. 28, 2010, had joined Facebook and had befriended a girl namely Tanzeela Mazeed after checking that many of his superior officers and colleagues were also on her friend list including SI Tiwari, S.K. Khan, Ct. Mishra and Commandant Ganguly and had been talking to her initially by believing that she was genuinely trying to befriend, but when she started asking questions regarding the Indian Army and other details of the CISF, the petitioner stopped communicating with her and when she threatened to inform his department, the petitioner immediately deleted his Facebook account which he had created.