SUJOY GUPTA, DEPUTY COMMANDANT CENTRAL INDUSTRIAL SECURITY FORCE UNIT, CHENNAI PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED, MANALI, CHENNAI Vs. DIRECTOR GENERAL, CENTRAL INDUSTRIAL SECURITY FORCE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Charge Memorandum issued against the writ petitioner by the Deputy Inspector General(Legal) in proceedings dated 24.05.2017 is under challenge in this writ petition.

(2.) The writ petitioner, Mr.Sujoy Gupta, Deputy Commandant, Central Industrial Security Force Unit ("CISF") has appeared as party-in-person. The writ petitioner is able to articulate his case in a proper manner. The petitioner contended that the charge memo against him is improper and contrary to the findings of the enquiry report made in this regard. The allegation of Supervisory lapses contended in the charge sheet are false and untenable on the ground that the enquiry report states that the writ petitioner is an innocent officer and uncommunicated with the crimes committed by certain other personnel working in "CISF". The petitioner is of an opinion that, when the enquiry report states that he is not responsible for any of the allegations, then there is no reason to proceed with the disciplinary proceedings against him. The petitioner has submitted the copy of the enquiry report stating that the findings are in his favour. Further, he contended that the Department is acting against him with a view to harass him. Thus, the charge sheet is liable to be scrapped.

(3.) The learned Assistant Solicitor General of India appearing on behalf of the respondents opposed the contentions by stating that it is premature to raise all these contentions at this point of time when the department has not in collusion in respect of the charges framed against the writ petitioner. The writ petitioner is a responsible officer working in the cadre of Deputy Commandant and therefore, the Charge Memorandum framed against him in respect of the supervisory lapses committed is to be examined in detail by the enquiry officer and only thereafter, the disciplinary authority will be in a position to take a decision in this regard. Even before forming a complete opinion in respect of such supervisory lapses, the disciplinary authority will not be in a position to arrive a conclusion whether the writ petitioner is innocent or not. Thus, the writ petition is premature and liable to be rejected in limini.