ANJUM ASGAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was a Constable on the establishment of Central Industrial Security Force. He remained absent from 28/02/ 1994 till

(2.) /03/1994 which is an absence of about 48 hours. The record produced by the respondents reveals that his two increments were with held by way of punishment for such absence. 2. It appears that subsequently respondents came to know that the petitioner had contracted second marriage during the period of absence and respondent (4) framed a charge against the petitioner not only for allegation of second marriage but also for the period of absence, despite the fact, that petitioner was punished for such absence. An enquiry was reportedly conducted and the impugned order depicts that a finding in respect of violation of Rule 21 of Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules 1964 {hereinafter referred to as conduct rules) and Rule 12(a) of the Central Industrial Security Rules 1969 (hereinafter referred to as CISF rules) was returned against the petitioner.

(3.) THE enquiry report was accepted, and the punishment of dismissal from service has been inflicted on the petitioner The petitioner has impugned the charge sheet, enquiry proceedings as also the final order passed against him on manifold grounds which include challenge to the competence as well.