K.RAMACHANDRAN Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The punishment of removal from service issued by the Disciplinary Authority, which was confirmed by the Appellate Authority are under challenge in the present writ petition.

(2.) The petitioner states that he joined as Constable in the Central Reserve Police Force (in short 'CRPF') on 15/4/1991 and had served all over India, more specifically at Ludhiana, Pattankot, Srinagar, Baramulla (Assam). When the petitioner was working at Jammu and Kashmir Area, he was transferred to GC/Avadi, Chennai. The petitioner states that he suffered Psychological and Neuro problems, for which, he had taken treatment at the Government General Hospital, Chennai. He was treated for Psychological problem of diagnosed as Anxiety OCD Disorder (obsessive - compulsive - Disorder) and was undergoing treatment from March 2004 onwards. He was issued with the provisional Fitness Certificate on 10/1/2005, stating that he had been attending to "Physhiatric out patient treatment" at Mental Health Centre - Chennai-10 regularly and declared provisionally fit and rejoined duty. After his full-improvement, he was issued with the full fitness certificate. The petitioner produced the fitness certificate before the GC/CRPF/Avadi, Chennai on 2/11/2007. The petitioner was about to get the posting orders for discharging his duties and he was informed by his colleagues that he had been transferred to 42-Battalion vide office order dtd. 15/9/2009. The petitioner filed Writ Petition in W.P.No.20612 of 2009 before the High Court and this Court referred the matter to CRPF, Avadi, Chennai - 65. He was advised to get a behaviour Report from CRPF, Avadi, Chennai. The respondents had advised the petitioner to come back to CRPF in February 2011 and then only, they will issue the "Final Fitness" Certificate to him. The behaviour report was given by the CRPF, Avadi on 24/9/2010 and thereafter, the provisional fitness certificate was issued on 20/11/2010 by the Senior Surgeon and Director of Mental Health Certificate is also granted after the "Behaviour Report" in February 2011. He was issued with the transfer order dtd. 5/1/2011 and he filed writ petition in W.P.No.7201 of 2011. The said writ petition was pending for about 1 year and 11 months and on 17/12/2012, this Court passed an order and the petitioner rejoined duty at 42 nd Battalion. However, the petitioner had not joined immediately on the ground that the final fitness certificate was not issued to him and overstayed for about 720 days.

(3.) A charge memorandum was issued, framing two Articles of Charges. The first charge is that the petitioner was relieved on transfer from GC, CRPF, Avadi on 10/1/2011 (AN) and reported at his own on 31/12/2012 (FN) after 720 days without any permission from the competent authority. The second charge is the consequential one. The petitioner defended his case by submitting his explanations. The petitioner mainly contended that he was under Medical treatment and further, not issued with the full fitness certificate. On account of the said reasons, the petitioner was not in a position to join duty immediately and the overstay was not wilful and due to certain genuine circumstances. Not satisfied with the explanation, the Disciplinary Authority appointed an enquiry officer, who in turn, conducted an enquiry by affording opportunity to the writ petitioner. The writ petitioner availed off the opportunity and defended his case. However, the enquiry officer submitted his final report, holding that the charges are held proved. Accepting the findings of the enquiry officer, the Disciplinary Authority issued show cause notice to the petitioner, providing an opportunity to submit his further objections on the findings of the Enquiry officer and finally, the order, imposing the punishment of removal from service was issued in proceedings dtd. 17/8/2015. The original order of punishment of removal from service was issued by the Commandant / 5 th respondent. The petitioner preferred an appeal before the Deputy Inspector General of Police / 4 th respondent, who in turn, rejected the appeal and confirmed the punishment of removal from service. Thereafter, the petitioner preferred Revision Petition before the Inspector General of Police / Southern Sector, CRPF / 3 rd respondent, who in turn, rejected the Revision Petition, confirming the orders passed by the Disciplinary Authority and the Appellate Authority. Thus, the petitioner is constrained to move the present writ petition.