RAHUL HIRAMAN BIRHADE Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was a member of the Central Industrial Security Force (hereafter "the CISF", for short). While holding the post of a constable, the petitioner has been removed from service by an order dtd. 7/5/2012 issued by his disciplinary authority, i.e., the Commandant CISF RTC Arakkonam. Such order has been affirmed by an order dated 8 th March 2018 of the appellate authority, i.e., the Deputy Inspector General, CISF RTC Arakkonam. The petitioner has taken exception to such orders in this writ petition.

(2.) It is not in dispute that the petitioner after availing 10 (ten) days of sanctioned earned leave from 18/8/2011, did not report back for duty. He did not also seek further leave or communicate the reason that disabled him from reporting for duty. Similarly worded call-up notices dtd. 3/9/2011, 12/9/2011, 27/9/2011 and 10 th/15/10/2011 were issued to him, whereby he was informed of his failure to report for duty from 29/8/2011 and that with effect from that date, he was overstaying leave without intimation or any permission from the competent authority. On each occasion, the petitioner was directed to report forthwith.

(3.) It is not in dispute that despite receipt of such call-up notices, the petitioner did not obey the order of his superior and report for duty. The aforesaid conduct of the petitioner overstaying his leave and remaining absent unauthorizedly, triggered disciplinary proceedings against him. A memorandum of charge dtd. 16/11/2011 was drawn up against the petitioner whereby he was charged as follows: -