MUTUM SHANTIKUMAR SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) It is the bounden duty of the concerned authority to act judiciously whenever the Rule of natural justice is applicable. No doubt, the Rule of natural justice is applicable to the departmental proceedings against a Govt. employee. Therefore there is insistence upon the department of "Fair hearing" in the departmental proceedings, against a Govt. employee. No doubt, whenever the Govt. of the concerned authority in the departmental enquiry acted in fragrant prejudice of the Rule of natural justice and fair play, the said departmental proceedings is liable to be quashed. It may, here, be recalled that Lord Diplock in the Council of Social Service Union Vrs. Minister for the Civil Services stated that "judicial review, as I think, development to a stage to-day when, without reiterating any analysis of the stage of which development has come about, one can conveniently classify under three heads : the grounds on which the administrative action is subject to control by judicial review. The first ground I would call' 'illegality'', the second ground "irrationality" and third ground "procedural propriety". That is not to say that further development on a case by case basis in course of time add further grounds. I have in my mind particularly possible adoption in the future of the principle "proportionality" which is recognized in the administrative law of several of our fellow members of the European Economic Community". The Apex Court in Sugarbai M. Siddiq and others Vrs. Ramsh S. Hankare (Dead) by LRS reported in (2001) 8 SCC 477 held that "the court is concerned not with the decision but with the decision making process."

(2.) Heard Mr. Kh. Tarunkumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. N. Ibotombi Singh, learned CGSC for the respondents.

(3.) In the above accepted principle of law, this writ petition is required to be discussed and disposed of. A short factual matrix will suffice for the decision of the present writ petition. The writ petitioner was appointed as Constable (General Duty) at the Group Canter, C.R.RF. Langjing, Imphal, Manipur in the month of January, 1994 and he was posted at various places within the territory of India, While he was posted at Sibsagar, Assam, there was an unfortunate incident on 13.4.2000 at Sabji Mandi Market, Sibsagar, Assam. For that incident the writ petitioner was placed under suspension in contemplation of a disciplinary proceeding vide order of the Commandant being No. P. VIII 2/ 2000-27-EC-H dated 13.4.2000. Thereafter, the Commandent 27BN CRPF issued a memorandum dated 18.4.2000 for holding a departmental enquiry against the petitioner and two article of charges were framed against him. The said two article of charges are quoted hereunder: ARTICLE-1