JOGINDER PAL Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed praying for quashing the order dated 29.02.2012 (Annexure P -3) whereby punishment of compulsory retirement has been imposed on the petitioner. Also challenged are the orders dated 22.06.2012 (Annexure P -4) and 05.11.2012 (Annexure P -5) whereby the appeal and revision of the petitioner against the said order has been dismissed.

(2.) The petitioner was enlisted in CRPF on 28.02.1992. It was alleged that on 24.07.2011, at 1430 hours, while the petitioner was detailed as Guard Commander of Quarter Guard for two days w.e.f. 23.07.2011 to 24.07.2011, he consumed alcohol/liquor and displayed ill manner behaviour under intoxication and started abusing in the line area. The matter was brought to the notice of the Commandant by O.C.G./190. Taking cognizance of the complaint lodged by O.C.G./190, the petitioner was attached with Unit Headquarter for attachment duty. On 07.08.2011, at 930 hours, he again consumed liquor and started abusing in the camp/line area of Bn. Headquarter. A preliminary enquiry was ordered into these two incidents vide order dated 08.08.2011 and on the same being prima facie proved, vide Office order dated 08.09.2011, a departmental enquiry under Sec. 11(1) of the Central Reserve Police Force Act, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as the "1949 Act"), read with Rule 27 of the Central Reserve Police Force Rules, 1975 (hereinafter referred to as the "1975 Rules") was initiated against the petitioner on the following charges:

(3.) The enquiry officer submitted his report dated 22.12.2011 (Annexure P -2), wherein, the allegation leveled in Article -I of Charge -1 namely that the petitioner consumed alcohol on 24.07.2011 during duty hours and instead of being on duty was lying on his bed in an intoxicated state and uttering non -sense, was held to have been fully proved. Article -2 of Charge -I, namely that on 07.08.2011, the petitioner while on duty at the Battalion Headquarter consumed excessive liquor and in an intoxicated state had removed his clothes and was walking about naked in the camp and shouting abuses was not fully proved. The Enquiry Officer held that though the petitioner had admitted this charge but on the basis of statements of witnesses, it was only partly proved to the extent that the petitioner had consumed alcohol and was uttering abuses. Article -I of Charge -2, that on 24.07.2011, the petitioner at 1400 hours during his duty from 1000 to 1800 hours was lying on his bed in an intoxicated state and uttering abuses and had vomited was held to have been fully proved. Article -ll of Charge -2 was proved to the extent that on 07.08.2011, the petitioner had consumed excessive liquor and was roaming about uttering abuses and disturbing the others present.