AJIT KUMAR DEB Vs. STATE OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ appeal is presented against the judgment and order dated 16. 06. 2005 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP (C) 275 (AP)/2004 at Itanagar Bench of this Court.

(2.) THE material facts, for the purpose of disposal of this appeal, are as follows :- The appellant was appointed as Constable in Civil Police and he was promoted to the post of Sub-Inspector of Police, Arunachal Pradesh. At the relevant time, he was posted at 2nd Bn. Arunachal Pradesh Police, Itanagar and he was entrusted with duties of Cashier in addition to his normal duties of maintaining law and order. By an order dated 01. 08. 1994, the appellant was placed under suspension by the Commandant, 2nd Bn. BHQ in contemplation of departmental enquiry. However, the said enquiry was not proceeded with and the same was cancelled by an order dated 26. 03. 1997 as it was not in conformity with the provisions of Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as the "rules" only ). The authority issued fresh memorandum of charges containing seven articles of charges vide order dated 26. 03. 1997. The appellant submitted his written statement of defence. The respondent authorities, not being satisfied with the same decided to conduct enquiry by appointing an Inquiry Officer. The enquiry was held and the Inquiry Officer found charges-I, II, III, IV and VI being proved against the appellant and submitted his report on 25. 01. 2002. The disciplinary authority forwarded the copies of the enquiry report to the appellant. The appellant submitted representation before the Deputy Inspector General of Police, PHQ, Itanagar in February, 2002 alleging that enquiry was improper and not in conformity with the provision of the Rules as he was not afforded with reasonable opportunity to defend his case. The disciplinary authority issued a show cause notice dated 12. 09. 2002 upon the appellant proposing to award him punishment of dismissal from service. The appellant submitted his reply to the aforesaid show cause notice but the respondent authorities, particularly, the respondent No. 3, Deputy Inspector General of Police, HQ, Itanagar being satisfied with the same, imposed penalty of compulsory retirement treating the period of suspension of the appellant with effect from 01. 08. 1994 to 17. 10. 1995 as not spent on duty. The appellant was verbally told that the order passed was final and there was no scope for preferring appeal against the same. Since the appellant was denied the opportunity of preferring appeal against the order of the disciplinary authority, he preferred a writ petition being WP (C) 30 (AP) 2003, which was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 27. 01. 2003 with a direction that the appellant should be given all legal opportunities for preferring appeal before the appropriate authority. The State respondents, being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, preferred an appeal being WA 50 of 2003 which was disposed of by an order dated 21. 02. 2003 holding that the appeal provided for by a statute is a right conferred by law.

(3.) WE have heard Mr. P. K. Tiwari, learned counsel for the appellant and also heard Ms. G. Deka, learned Additional Senior Govt. Advocate, appearing for the State respondents.