RAKESH KR GAUR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was working as a Havildar in the Assam Rifles at the relevant point of time. On 13.8.98, a Court of Enquiry was held by the Assam Rifles authorities with regard to an incident of loss/disappearance of the Arms and Ammunition allotted to the writ petitioner while he was in transit from Dimapur to Diphu. The Court of Enquiry recorded its findings adverse to the writ petitioner and the authority on consideration of the findings of the said Court of Enquiry, recommended a departmental proceeding against the petitioner by an order dated 20.10.98. The petitioner was served with a show cause notice dated 13.2.99 and the summary of evidence in the case was recorded on 26.3.99. The statements of four persons including the petitioner were recorded. Thereafter, on 19.6.99, a Charge Sheet was issued against the writ petitioner and pursuant thereto a Summary Court Martial was held on 24.6.99. The petitioner was found guilty in the said proceedings and dismissed from service. Aggrieved, the instant writ application has been filed.

(2.) The charge framed against the writ petitioner in the Summary Court Martial held against him may be usefully set out as hereunder:

(3.) In the Court Martial proceedings, the minutes of which has been brought on record by the respondents, the charge levelled against the writ petitioner, it is claimed, was explained to him and the writ petitioner pleaded guilty to the said charge. Thereafter, following the provisions of Rule 115 of the Army Rules, the Officer conducting the Court Martial proceeding made the necessary recordings as mandated by the aforesaid provisions of the Rules and, thereafter, the impugned punishment was imposed. The proceedings of the Summary Court Martial including the punishment imposed having been concurred with by the competent authority, an appeal was filed by the present writ petitioner. However, before the same could be finalised, the instant recourse to the writ jurisdiction was made by the writ petitioner. Having regard to the time which has elapsed during the pendency of the present proceeding this court is not inclined to send the matter back to the appellate authority for consideration and instead considers it more appropriate to hear the writ petition on merits and finally adjudicate on the entitlement of the writ petitioner to the relief/reliefs claimed.