JARNAIL SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner's services were terminated by the dismissal order dated 30.9.2003. The order of termination was upheld in appeal vide order dated 18.6.2004. The revision petition preferred before the Director General of Police, CRPF has been rejected on 16.8.2009. Against the aforesaid orders, the present petition has been filed praying that the impugned orders may be set aside and the petitioner reinstated to service. The charge against the petitioner was that while working as a Constable (Mali) he remained absent from duty from 17.9.2002 to 9.2.2003, i.e., for a period of 146 days without prior permission of the competent authority and without leave being sanctioned. He was issued a charge sheet under Section 11(1) of the CRPF Act, 1949. The second charge was that he had not obeyed the lawful orders of his seniors and in spite of orders conveyed for joining his duties immediately by the Assistant Commandant (HQ), Group Centre, Pinjore sent through registered letter dated 21.11.2002 he had not reported to duty which was against good discipline and orders of the Force. In the inquiry held, the charges were proven. Punishment of dismissal from service followed.

(2.) It was the defence of the petitioner in the inquiry proceedings and in appeal and revision against the orders of dismissal that throughout the period under charge sheet he was performing the duties of a Mali at the residence of Special Director General of Police, CRPF, Ghaziabad. Two official witnesses deposed in the inquiry that the petitioner was deputed at the residence of Special Director General of Police, CRPF as a Ct./Mali on verbal orders and remained there performing his duties at the residence till 8.2.2003. On 8.2.2003, he reported at Group Centre, Gurgaon for joining back to his job. He was informed by verbal order to report at Group Centre, Pinjore. This is the statement of Constable G.D. Salim Tamboli. The second witness Rewat Singh deposed that on 25.11.2001 the petitioner was deputed to work as Ct./Mali at the residence of the Special Director General of Police, CRPF, Ghaziabad. This was also on verbal orders. He remained discharging his duties at the residence of Special Director General of Police till 8.2.2003. Both the official witnesses were cross-examined by the Inquiry Officer himself. The Deputy Director (Administration), Shri Ishwar Dass Sharma posted at Group Centre, Gurgaon at the relevant time appeared before the Inquiry Officer and deposed as per record that the petitioner had reported on 25.11.2001 at Group Centre, Gurgaon. He was deputed at the residence of Special Director General of Police, Ghaziabad where he worked till 8.2.2003. He was relieved by oral orders to join at Pinjore. The Special Director General of Police, CRPF Shri J.P.Verma was not produced as a witness to substantiate the charges levelled. The Director General of Police in the order rejecting the revision petition dated 6.8.2009 has held that the petitioner was staying at the residence of Shri J.P.Verma, IPS, Ex-Special Director General of Police, CRPF at Ghaizabad ignoring the orders issued through letter asking him to report for duty in Group Centre, Pinjore.

(3.) In the written statement filed by CRPF, it is stated that when the petitioner failed to report for duty, an official complaint was lodged in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate-cum-Additional DIGP, GC, CRPF, Pinjore under Section 10(m) of the CRPF Act, 1949. The Additional DIGP armed with powers of CJM took cognizance of the offence and issued warrants of arrest against the petitioner which was sent to SP, Una for execution vide letter dated 1.12.2002. In the meantime, he joined duty on 9.2.2003 after absenting himself for 146 days. Accordingly, warrants of arrest were cancelled and the departmental inquiry was ordered against the petitioner vide order dated 18.2.2003. The official letters attached with the written statement was addressed to CT-Mali Jarnail Singh petitioner care of Shri J.P.Verma, IPS (Retired), 1405, Pachmadi, Kaushambi Complex, Ghaziabad (UP). Of the two letters sent on 24.9.2002 and 9.10.2002, one was received back undelivered with the remarks that the recipient is on leave, hence returned and therefore, it has been inferred that he was on leave. This inference was drawn in the letter dated 21.11.2002 also addressed to the petitioner at the address of Mr.J.P.Verma, IPS.