AJAY KUMAR PASWAN Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Whether failure of the Disciplinary Authority to appoint Presenting Officer irrespective of any prejudice to the delinquent employee who did not deny the charges by filing written statement or otherwise and rather had pleaded guilty, can vitiate the whole proceeding is the moot question to be answered in this writ petition.

(2.) In this case, the writ petitioner who was a constable in the CRPF was dismissed from service, inter alia, on the basis of admitted charges of misconduct including a one involving moral turpitude bringing disrepute to the disciplined force which were also proved independently by the witnesses and an appeal preferred there against also failed. By this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the said order of dismissal dated 7.5.2011 passed by the respondent No. 4. The appellate order refusing to interfere with the order of dismissal dated 7.5.2011 has also been challenged hereby.

(3.) The factual matrix on which this writ petition is founded is required to be narrated in short. Petitioner, Ajay Kumar Paswan was a Constable in the CRPF. He was placed under suspension under Rule 10(a) of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 read with Rule 27(A) of the CRPF Rule 1955 on 10.1.2011 by an order of the Commandant -186 Bn. On the same date a memorandum as to substance of imputation was served on him along with statements of imputation. By the said memorandum he was asked to give his written statement of defence within 10 days and also to state whether he desired to be heard in person. It was specifically mentioned therein that in case he failed to submit written statement as required and/or did not appear, inquiry would be held against him ex parte. The articles of charges framed against him are as follows: