MINAKETAN KANHAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed this petition assailing the order of his removal from service passed by the Disciplinary Authority dated 24.08.2007 vide Annexure-4 and confirmation thereof by order of the Appellate Authority dated 05.04.2008, vide Annexure -5, the petitioner has filed this application seeking direction to reinstate him in service with all consequential benefits.

(2.) The short fact of the case, in hand, is that the petitioner being successful in all tests of selection was appointed as a Constable/GD in Group Centre CRPF, Bhubaneswar on 01.04.1988. After his joining, he was sent to Group Centre CRPF Mukamghat in 95 Battalion CRPF. Thereafter on completion of training, he was posted to 4th Battalion CRPF and while he was continuing in that Battalion he was promoted to the post of HC/GD(Havildar) in the year 2004 and posted to D Company of 4th Battalion CRPF, which was deployed in the residence of the Hon'ble Chief Minister, Jammu and Kashmir for security purpose. In that Company there were 14 guard posts and in each post three constables and one Havildar were deployed. The petitioner, being a Havildar, was deployed in Post no.11 as Guard Commander. On 03.04.2006 a Constable known as CT/GD- Anand Singh from Post No.3 became violent and opened fire at three CRPF personnel, such as, Inspector Mohan Shyam (Company Commander) was deployed in front of Kote guard of the said company, HC/GD-H.N.Pandey was deployed in front of ORS Line No.3 and HC/GD-Yogendra Jha was deployed at ORS Mess, consequent upon which they succumbed to the injuries on the very date. After hearing the sound, all the company personnel including the petitioner became stand still to but taking advantage of darkness, the assailant escaped from the place and surrendered in the nearby Police Station. After the above incident, inquiry was conducted by the authorities and after completion of the same, charge-sheet was submitted by the Disciplinary Authority namely, Commandant 4th Battalion CRPF against three persons including the petitioner. Thereafter on 12.12.2006 vide Annexure-1, the petitioner was called upon to show cause. In compliance with the same, the petitioner submitted his show cause reply on 09.01.2007 denying the allegation of negligence. The Disciplinary Authority without considering the same, appointed one Sri Jaikisan A/C 4th Battalion CRPF as Enquiring Officer to enquire into the matter under Sub-Rule (b) of Rule 27 of CRPF Rules, 1955 under Annexure-2. Pursuant to the above order, the inquiry was conducted by the Enquiring Officer and report was submitted before the Disciplinary Authority against the petitioner on 23.04.2007 finding him guilty of the charges. The said inquiry report was sent to the petitioner by the Disciplinary Authority to file representation, if he desired, within 15 days from the date of receipt of that report vide Annexure-3. In obedience to the order of the Disciplinary Authority, the petitioner filed his reply denying his fault in the said incident, but without examining the same in a proper perspective, the DIGP, CRPF, Patna removed the petitioner from service on 24.08.2004 vide Annexure-4. Being aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Inspector General, CRPF, Bihar for setting aside the same but the Appellate Authority without application of mind confirmed the order of removal of the petitioner from service by rejecting his appeal vide Annexure-5.

(3.) Mr. C.R. Pattnaik, learned counsel for the petitioner, strenuously urged that the impugned order has been passed without application of mind in as much as in non-compliance with the provisions contained in CRPF Rules, 1955. To substantiate his contention he has relied upon the judgment of the Apex Court in Govt. of Andhra Pradesh and Others v. A.Venkata Raidu, 2007 1 SCC 338, Rajendra Yadav v. State of M.P. & Others, 2013 2 OrissaLR 48, State of Uttar Pradesh and others v. Raj Pal Singh, 2010 5 SCC 783, Damoh Panna Sagar Rural Regional Bank and another v. Munna Lal Jain, 2005 10 SCC 84 and Union of India v. Giriraj Sharma, 1994 AIR(SC) 215.