ABDUL RAHMAN Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner, who is a member of Indian Police Service (IPS) borne on Maharashtra Cadre, challenging the judgment and order dtd. 7/12/2023 passed by Mumbai Bench of Central Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as "Tribunal"), whereby Original Application No. 758 of 2019 filed by him has been dismissed and his prayer for quashing the decision dtd. 25/10/2019 rejecting his prayer for voluntary retirement has not been acceded to.

(2.) Certain facts, which are necessary for proper adjudication of the issue involved in this petition, need to be noted. The petitioner is a 1997 batch IPS officer. By moving an application on 20/3/2018 to the State Government, he sought voluntary retirement from service, however, the said prayer was rejected by the Central Government by means of the order dtd. 1/6/2018 for the reason that the petitioner was not found clear from vigilance angle and disciplinary proceedings were pending/contemplated against him. Prior to the application dtd. 20/3/2018, the petitioner was denied his promotion, which led him to file Original Application No. 743 of 2017 before the Tribunal, which was allowed by means of order dtd. 18/12/2018 directing the respondents therein to hold review Departmental Promotion Committee and consider the petitioner for promotion in the rank of Special Inspector General of Police with effect from the date his immediate junior was promoted.

(3.) In respect of certain charges, some departmental proceedings were also pending against the petitioner, however, the said departmental proceedings culminated in the order of exoneration passed on 1/1/2019 and thereafter, the petitioner again moved an application dated 1 st August 2019 to the State Government seeking voluntary retirement. On the said application, the State Government sent the proposal for voluntary retirement of the petitioner to the Government of India, by means of letter dtd. 16/10/2019 mentioning therein that the three disciplinary proceedings are contemplated against the petitioner, however, further observing therein that the charge-sheets in respect of the said contemplated disciplinary proceedings were not issued and that it seems that no major penalty may be imposed on the officer in all the three contemplated disciplinary actions.