SUNIL KUMAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by his removal from service, the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to reinstate him in service. He has also prayed for directions to the respondents to treat and adjust his period of absence from duty against his outstanding leaves and to reduce the punishment in proportion of gravity of offence instead of termination.

(2.) Briefly stated the facts of the case are that on 15.5.2001 the petitioner was appointed as CT/GD no.015233807 by the respondents and thereafter he was sent for training to Srinagar, RTC-4. After completion of the training, he was posted with 89 Battalion, CRPF, Srinagar, Anant Nag where he worked for three years. Subsequently, the said 98 Battalion of CRPF was shifted to Delhi at Bawana near Narela and the petitioner was transferred to Delhi along with the said Battalion. After sometimes, 98 Battalion of CRPF got dissolved and the petitioner was then transferred to 2nd Battalion of CRPF on 23.8.2004 From there the petitioner deserted the Unit Lines/Camp on 9.11.2004 at 1300 hrs. without permission of the competent authority and consequently a warrant of arrest was issued to Superintendent of Police, Mohindergarh (Haryana) vide Office letter no.W.II-9/2004-02-EC.II dated 13.11.2004 for his apprehension. However, the petitioner reported back on duty on his own on 30.11.2004 at 1215 hrs. He again deserted from the Camp on 1.12.2004 at 1000 hrs. without permission of the competent authority and again warrant of arrest was issued to Superintendent of Police, Mohindergarh (Haryana) vide Office letter no.W.II-9/2004-02-EC.II dated 8.12.2004 However, he again reported back on duty on 27.12.2004 at 1700 hrs. and was produced before the Commandant-cum-Chief Judicial Magistrate on 28.12.2004 and released on bail. He again deserted from the Camp on 30.12.2004 at 0450 hrs. without permission/sanction of the competent authority. On receipt of written complaint from OC E/2, warrant of arrest was again issued on 7.11.2005 for his apprehension. The petitioner was neither apprehended nor did he report for duty nor any communication was received from him by the Department. As a result, a departmental enquiry was ordered vide Office Order Memorandum no.P.VIII-2/2005- 02-EC.II dated 22.1.2005 and the copy of the same was sent to petitioner's home address provided to the Department by the petitioner himself. The petitioner even thereafter did not report for duty nor did he send any communication/written reply to the charges as required under Rules on receipt of Memorandum. Shri L R Sharma, Assistant Commandant, was appointed as Enquiry Officer to enquire into the charges framed against him. The Enquiry Officer vide letter no.G.II-1/05.LRS dated 10.2.2005 directed the petitioner to appear before him for conducting the enquiry against him. However, he did not respond to the said notice. The Enquiry Officer vide letter dated 27.2.2005 again directed the petitioner to appear before him in connection with the enquiry but he opted not to appear in the enquiry for reasons best known to him. Under the circumstances, ex parte enquiry was conducted by the Enquiry Officer against the petitioner and after completion of the said enquiry, the charges framed again him were found proved. A copy of the enquiry report was sent to the petitioner by the Disciplinary Authority vide letter no.P.VIII-2/2005-02-EC.II dated 5.7.2005 with a direction to submit reply/representation with defence evidence/supporting documents, if any, within 15 days. The petitioner did not send any reply in his defence to the findings against him in the enquiry report. Consequently, the Disciplinary Authority, i.e. Commandant, 2nd Battalion, CRPF, after going through the departmental proceedings and material evidence agreed with the report of the Enquiry Officer and held the petitioner guilty of charges of unauthorised absence proved against him. The Disciplinary Authority imposed the penalty of ?Removal from Service? w.e.f. 22.7.2005 vide Office Order no.P.VIII-2/2005-02-EC.II dated 22.7.2005 under Section 11(1) of CRPF Act, 1949 read with Rule 27(a) of the CRPF Rules, 1955.

(3.) Aggrieved by the impugned order of 'Removal from Service' issued by the Disciplinary Authority, the petitioner preferred an appeal dated 30.8.2005, which was considered but rejected by the Appellate Authority i.e. DIGP, CRPF, Jammu being devoid of any merit vide letter no.R.XIII2(1)/05-EC-111 dated 12.11.2005.