HASSANDEEN Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been preferred by Hassandeen, once a Constable (General Duty) with the Central Industrial Security Force (for short, 'the CISF'), who has been dismissed from service by the Group Commandant, CISF Group Headquarters, Allahabad vide order dtd. 11/4/2012. This order has been affirmed in appeal by the Deputy Inspector General of Police, CISF, Allahabad vide order dtd. 14/8/2012 and further upheld in revision by the Inspector General, North Sector, CISF, New Delhi on the 3rd of January, 2014 by an order of that date.

(2.) This is a case where the order of dismissal from service has been passed against the petitioner by the Disciplinary Authority in the exercise of powers under Rule 39 (ii) of the Central Industrial Security Force Rules, 2001 (for short, 'the Rules'), without holding an inquiry on grounds recorded in writing in the order impugned that it is not reasonably practicable to hold it.

(3.) The facts giving rise to this petition are: The petitioner was selected and appointed to the CISF as a Constable (General Duty) (for short, 'Constable GD') in the year 1999. He was posted in the Fourth Battalion, Government Opium Factory, Ghazipur as Constable GD, CISF Unit, Ghazipur. During the period of his posting at the CISF Unit, Ghazipur, a First Information Report (for short, 'the FIR') came to be lodged by the Station House Officer, Police Station Jaitpura, District Varanasi against the petitioner, besides another ten accused, giving rise to Crime No.54 of 2012, under Sec. 8/22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, 'NDPS Act'), Police Station Jaitpura, District Varanasi. The FIR aforesaid was lodged on 29/2/2012. The petitioner was arrested by the Police in connection with the said crime on 17/3/2012 and remanded to judicial custody. The Group Commandant, CISF Group Headquarters, Allahabad was informed of the fact by the Senior Sub-Inspector, Police Station Jaitpura, District Varanasi by his letter of 18/3/2012. In consequence, by an order dtd. 18/3/2012, the petitioner was placed under suspension by the Group Commandant w.e.f. 17/3/2012. On the 11/4/2012, the Group Commandant proceeded to dismiss the petitioner from service invoking his powers under Rule 39(ii) of the Rules, without holding an inquiry on ground that it was not reasonably practicable. The reasons to proceed on the basis that it was not reasonably practicable to hold an inquiry are carried in the impugned order of dismissal dtd. 11/4/2012. Allusion to these reasons shall be made during the course of this judgment.