LAWS(JHAR)-2012-7-279

C.I.S.F. NO. 802230188, CONSTABLE B.N. SHARMA @ BISWANATH SHARMA Vs. UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTING CENTRAL INDUSTRIAL SECURITY FORCE DEPARTMENT

Decided On July 26, 2012
C.I.S.F. No. 802230188, Constable B.N. Sharma @ Biswanath Sharma Appellant
V/S
Union Of India Representing Central Industrial Security Force Department Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was working as constable in Central Industrial Security Force (in short "C.I.S.F."). The petitioner was on duty in 'C Shift in C.I.S.F. Unit of Heavy Engineering Corporation, Ranchi on 7.9.1998 from 2100 hours to 0500 hours on 8.9.1998. During his duty hours, one miscreant entered the shop and collected "Brass Chips" and while carrying the bags containing the brass chips noticed by other CISF Jawans. He was chased, however, taking benefit of darkness, he vanished from the spot, leaving behind the bag containing stolen 'Brass Chips'. The petitioner was directed by the Assistant Commandant of the CISF to attend orderly room at 3.30 p.m. on 8.9.1998 itself. However, the petitioner did not report to the Assistant Commandant. Thereafter the petitioner was charged on two counts, which are quoted below.

(2.) Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner filed statutory appeal which too, was dismissed vide order dated 4.12.1999. Further feeling aggrieved, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of present writ petition.

(3.) Mr. V. Shivnath, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner has vehemently argued that there was an attempt to theft. However, in time, action of theft was detected and nothing could be stolen from the site under the patrolling duty of the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner cannot be held negligent while on duty, hence charge No. 1 is not proved. He has further argued that the petitioner has reported late on 8.9.1998 itself to the office of the Assistant Commandant, therefore, punishment of removal for reporting late seems to be shocking and lesser punishment could have been awarded to the petitioner.