DILWINDER SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner who was appointed as a constable on 19/11/1991 in the CRPF, was removed from service with effect from 16/5/2001 vide order dtd. 15/5/2001 passed by the respondent No. 6. The petitioner assailed the order of his removal from the service through the medium of an appeal but the same was dismissed by the respondent No. 5 vide order dtd. 21/5/2002. Thereafter, the petitioner preferred the revision before the respondent No. 2, but the same too was dismissed by the respondent No. 2 vide order dtd. 30/9/2002.

(2.) The petitioner has filed the present petition for quashing the above mentioned orders as well as the departmental proceedings initiated against the petitioner and for directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for his reinstatement and to allow the petitioner to resume his duties on the post of constable and to grant all the consequential benefits to the petitioner.

(3.) The petitioner has assailed the order dtd. 15/5/2001 issued by the respondent No. 6 on the ground that the false and frivolous charges were framed against the petitioner and the respondents did not conduct any enquiry as contemplated under Rule 27 of CRPF Rules and as the respondents had framed the charges against the petitioner only under Sec. 11(1) of the CRPF Act, 1949, therefore only minor punishments could have been imposed upon the petitioner and the Sec. 11 of the CRPF Act does not contemplate the punishment of removal from service. It is also urged by the petitioner that the respondents have imposed a major punishment, which is disproportionate to the alleged act of misconduct attributed to the petitioner and that too without conducting any proper enquiry in terms of Rule 15 of CCS (CCA Rules) 1965.