SANTOSH CHAKMA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petitioner being aggrieved by the dismissal order dated 18th July, 2014 is before this Court assailing the same on the grounds that firstly, the dismissal order was passed by an authority not competent to pass the same, and secondly, that the alleged accusation of furnishing false information is not correct and infact, the petitioner was a resident of Arunachal Pradesh, and due to some clerical omissions was punished with dismissal from service.

(2.) I have heard learned counsels for the parties.

(3.) Ms. L. Khiangte, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the writ petitioner was issued a show cause notice on 14th June, 2014 on the allegation of furnishing false information as to the permanent address, at the time of recruitment for the post of Nursing Assistant into the Assam Rifles. She submits that the petitioner had filed a reply to the same stating the reason therein that the address given in the application form was of Arunachal Pradesh, where the petitioner had studied and was residing there due to the remoteness and bad connectivity of his native village namely, Silsury, under Mamit District of Mizoram. She further submits that after the show cause notice was replied, the writ petitioner was served with the impugned order of dismissal dated 18th July, 2014 on the ground of submitting false information. Learned counsel then also contends that the impugned order was issued by an authority not competent to issue the same, as per Section 11 (2) of the Assam Rifles Act, 2006. To buttress her submissions, she has placed reliance on the judgment and order dated 24.07.2015 in WP(C) No. 169 of 2014 passed by this Court in the case of Shri. Karam Singh v. Union of India and Ors. She lastly submits that the dismissal being arbitrary for non-consideration that alleged false information were mere clerical omissions and passed by an authority not competent to do so, the impugned order was liable to be set aside and quashed.