CHAIN LAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER Chain Lal was working as Hawaldar clerk (No. 6367311) 221 COU ASC ( Supply) Type G. By means of Order No. 2041/936/A3 dated 22. 3. 1995, which is impugned in the present petition, he has been dismissed from service under section 20(3) of the Army Act read with Rule 17 of the Army Rules, 1954.

(2.) IN the year 1989 when the petitioner was posted at Srinagar some pilferage of milk powder was deducted when some consignment of milk powder were received by filed supply Depot at Leh. On this deduction the respondents ordered convening of a Court of Enquiry at Leh so as to pin point the responsibility for the replacement of the milk powder with Atta. The Court of Enquiry was conducted and the opinion was also placed before the respondents. It was found that the petitioner with intent to defraud, included O.500 tonnes of Atta in place of milk powder (sweetened) in a consignment of 5.060 Tonnes of such milk powder despatched to Filed Supply Depot, Leh. Later the Summary General Court Martial was convened to try the petitioner but the same was dissolved on 18.6.1983 since it had became inexpedient and impracticable to concluded it due to the non -availability of essential witnesses. Consequent to it Commander, 31 Sub Area, directed that administrative action in the form of termination of the service of the petitioner under Army Act Section 20(3) read with Army Rule 17 be taken against the petitioner for the following charges:

(3.) ACCORDINGLY a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner in January 1994. Petitions (SWP No. 275/94 & SWP No. 2732/94 ) were filed by the petitioner before this Court to challenge the said show cause notice which ultimately got disposed of. It was held in the later case that the petition was pre -mature as the respondents had issued mere a show cause notice to the petitioner to explain the circumstances. The petitioner, thereafter filed his reply to the show cause notice. This was followed by an order dated 22.3.1995 by means of which the petitioner has been dismissed from service. It is this order which is impugned in the present petition.