KRISHNA PRASAD Vs. THE UNION OF INDIA (UOI) THROUGH THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL, CENTRAL INDUSTRIAL SECURITY FORCE (MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS),

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned Counsel for the parties.

(2.) PETITIONER , in this writ application, has prayed for an order in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated -26.06.2007 (Annexure -5) whereby the petitioner has been punished by way of his compulsory retirement from service. Further prayer has been made for quashing the order of the appellate authority dated -03.09.2007 (Annexure -7), whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order of his compulsory retirement, has been dismissed.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner has assailed the impugned orders both of the Disciplinary Authority as well as of the Appellate Authority on the ground that the same has been passed without appreciating the facts and the defence of the petitioner, in proper perspective and without even considering the fact that taking the evidences as they appear on record, the punishment is highly disproportionate to the charge. Learned Counsel explains that the petitioner had adequately explained the circumstances in which the Arms and ammunition were stolen and had also stated that he had lodged a prompt F.I.R. regarding the theft of Arms and ammunition but this aspect of the petitioner's defence has not been appreciated by the Disciplinary Authority. It is further contended that the order directing the petitioner to deposit the amount by way of compensating for the loss of Arms and ammunition, amounts to double punishment and double jeopardy, which the Respondents cannot impose.