S LEISTER Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AGGRIEVED by the orders of the respondents dated 15. 12. 2001, 28. 03. 2002 and 25. 09. 2002, the petitioner has filed the above writ petition, to quash the same and direct the respondents to reinstate him in service with backwages and all other attendant benefits.

(2.) ACCORDING to the petitioner, initially he was appointed in the Central Industrial Security Force (hereafter referred to as "cisf") on 25. 03. 1982. Thereafter, he was transferred and posted to CISF Unit, Chennai Port Trust in the month of July, 1998. while he was serving at Chennai Port Trust, he was served with charge memo, which reads as follows:

(3.) IT is not in dispute that he participated in the enquiry and putforth his defence. It is seen from the records that the complainant, wife of B. T. Rao was examined as C. W. 1 and another eye witness was examined as C. W. 2. Apart from the above witnesses, the prosecution has examined four witnesses as P. Ws. 1 to 4 to prove the charge levelled against the petitioner. The petitioner himself was examined as D. W. 1 and one more witness was examined as D. W. 2. The Enquiry Officer, after considering the oral and documentary evidence, arrived a conclusion that the charge levelled against the petitioner is proved and submitted his report. The disciplinary authority, after accepting the report of the Enquiry Officer, imposed a punishment of compulsory retirement from service with full pension and gratuity benefits as per the existing rules with effect from the date of receipt of the said order. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner preferred an appeal. The Appellate Authority, considering the grounds raised and the order passed by the disciplinary authority, concurred with the conclusion arrived and rejected the appeal. The revision filed against the said order has also been dismissed.