Satyam Mahapatra Vs Union of India

The petitioner has challenged removal from his service and claimed reinstatement with all consequential benefits and filed the present writ petition claiming the following reliefs:-

¶21

2

¶22

“10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate direction and call for entire records pertaining to the case.

¶23

10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the impugned orders Annexure P/1 dated 18.6.2021 Annexure P/2 dated 4.12.2020 and Annexure P/3 dated 20.6.2018.

¶24

10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may be further pleased to direct the respondents authorities directing them to reinstate the petitioner back in services with all the consequential benefits of back wages, seniority continuity of service and all other consequential benefits.

¶25

10.4 Any other relief as may be directed by the Hon'ble court in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case.”

¶26

The petitioner was a constable in the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) and was posted at 233 Battalion. He was sent for his own treatment at 65 Btn. CRPF, Raipur on 12.07.2017, but he did not report there and remained absent from duty without permission of the competent authority. Due to his unauthorized absence from duty, a complaint was lodged on 31.08.2017. Based on the complaint, a warrant of arrest was issued against the petitioner on 05.09.2017 by the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate-cum-Commandant 223 Btn. CRPF, Kamapedaguda, Dornapal, Sukma. Considering his unauthorized absence under sub-rule 31(C) of CRPF Rules, 1955, the petitioner was declared a deserter vide order dated 25.01.2018. Thereafter, a departmental enquiry was initiated on 16.02.2018 as provided under Section 11(1) of the CRPF Act, 1949, read with Rule 27 of the CRPF Rules, 1955. After unauthorized absent from duty for 223 days, the petitioner appeared on 20.02.2018 (AN), and the warrant of arrest issued against him was cancelled by the Chief Judicial Magistrate on 21.02.2018. In the departmental enquiry, the charges of

¶27

3

¶28

Article-I and II were found proved; however, the charge of Article-III was found not proved. Thereafter, the order of punishment of removal from service was issued on 20.06.2018. The order of removal from service was challenged by the petitioner by filing the departmental appeal, which was rejected on 04.12.2020 (Annexure P/2), and the revision filed by the petitioner has also been dismissed by the order dated 18.06.2021, hence this petition.

¶29

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, during the departmental enquiry, the petitioner was not provided a proper opportunity to defend his case and to cross-examine the witnesses. Even the documents have not been provided to the petitioner. Mere absence from duty is not sufficient to pass the major penalty of removal from service. The absence from duty was not willful and was under compelling circumstances, and it cannot be considered a willful or deliberate absence from duty, and the petitioner cannot be penalised for the same. He would also submit that the petitioner has made his application for the supply of the documents under the RTI Act, but the same has also been rejected by saying that the copies of the documents have already been supplied to the petitioner and the same cannot again be supplied. He would further submit that there is a procedure prescribed for conducting the departmental enquiry under the CRPF Rules, but the same has not been followed. The departmental appeal and the revision filed by the petitioner have been decided mechanically without considering the grievance of the petitioner; therefore, the impugned orders are liable to be set aside/quashed and the petitioner is entitled to reinstatement in service

¶30

4

¶31

with all consequential benefits.

¶32

On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondents would oppose and submit that the petitioner was appointed in the year 2013 to the post of Constable in CRPF and after completion of his basic training, he was reported in 223 Btn. on 16.11.2014. The petitioner was sent for self-treatment at 65 Btn. CRPF, Raipur on 12.07.2017, but he did not report there and remained absent from 13.07.2017 (FN) without permission of the competent authority. A complaint was also lodged by the Adjutant Br. 223 Bn. on 31.08.2017, and based on the complaint, the Chief Judicial Magistrate-cumCommandant, 223 Btn. issued a warrant of arrest against the petitioner on 05.09.2017. Vide order dated 25.01.2018, the petitioner was declared deserter, and thereafter, a departmental enquiry was initiated vide office memorandum dated 16.02.2018. Since the petitioner did not appear, the copy of the memorandum of charges of Annexure-I, II and III, along with documents, list of witnesses (Annexure-IV) were sent to the petitioner to his home address by registered post on 16.02.2018. On 20.02.2018 (AN), the petitioner reported himself for defence before 223 Btn. Headquarter, Dornapal, Sukma (C.G.), after total unauthorized absence from duty of 223 days. He was produced before the Chief Judicial Magistrate-cumCommandant, 223 Btn. on 21.02.2018, and the warrant of arrest issued against him was cancelled. During the departmental enquiry, the petitioner was provided ample opportunity to have a defence assistance, but he refused to accept any defence assistance. He was also produced before the inquiry officer for cross-examination of the

¶33

5

¶34

witnesses and to defend himself, and he was asked to produce evidence in support of his defence, but he failed to produce any document/evidence, etc. in his defence. After giving sufficient opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the inquiry officer submitted the inquiry report to the disciplinary authority i.e. the Commandant, 223 Btn., who found the Article-I and II of the charges proved against the petitioner and Article-III is not proved, and has passed an order of punishment of removal from service against the petitioner on 20.06.2018. The petitioner had challenged the departmental appeal as well as revision before the appellate authority and revisional authority, and his appeal and revision have also been dismissed vide orders dated 04.12.2020 and 18.06.2021, respectively. He would also submit that the copies of all the documents have been duly provided to the petitioner and sufficient opportunity was provided to him in the departmental enquiry proceeding. The petitioner not only disregarded the orders given by the competent authority, but also not follow the instructions given by the office. The absence from duty without any sanctioned leave or permission clearly indicates that the individual, while performing duties in the SOZ area, disobeyed the lawful orders of disciplined force and thereby the punishment imposed by the authorities is justified. After due application of mind, his appeal and revision have been dismissed. The order of punishment is rightly commensurate with the gravity of the offence committed by the petitioner. Therefore, there is no merit in the petition, and the same is liable to be dismissed.

¶35

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material

¶36

6

¶37

available in the petition filed by both parties.

¶38

The submission of the petitioner is that he has not been provided a proper opportunity of hearing, and to defend his case in the departmental enquiry proceeding, he was not supplied the documents and not permitted to cross-examine the witnesses. On 05.09.2022 and 17.03.2025, the respondents were directed to make available the record of the departmental enquiry against the petitioner for its perusal. During the course of the hearing, the respondents produced the attested copy of the record of departmental enquiry against the petitioner for its perusal. In the chart prepared by the authority, which is named as Dainik Karyawahi Vivran , the details of the proceedings of the date of hearing have been summarised, in which the signature of the petitioner is also there on the dates, on which he appeared in the departmental enquiry proceedings, which are reproduced hereinbelow:-

¶39

// द�न ै ि �क क�र ्या ��व ा �ह ी � न ि व ा व ा रण //

¶40

निदै��क वा स्था��	दै�नि�क क�र्या�वा�ही� क� निवावारण	अनि�र्या�ज� पक्ष क� गवा�ही क� हीस्ता�क्षर	आर�निपता कर्म�चा�र� क� हीस्ता�क्षर	प्रस्ता�ता अधि!क�र� क� हीस्ता�क्षर	ज�"चा अधि!क�र� क� हीस्ता�क्षर
10/03/18	बल सं�०135324015धिसंप�ही�/निबग�० संत्र्यार्म र्मही�र्या�त्रा� क� निवारुद्ध निवा��ग�र्या ज�"चा ही�ता� श्री� सं�शी�ल क�र्म�र शीर्म�� क�223बटा� क� क�र्या��लर्या आदै�शी सं�० प�०आता- 02/2018-223-स्था�०दै� निदै��क10र्म�चा�2018क� ताहीता ज�"चा अधि!क�र� नि�र्या�क्त निकर्या� गर्या�।	x	Sd/-	Sd/-	Sd/-
16/03/18	बल सं�०135324015धिसंप�ही�/निबग�० संत्र्यार्म र्मही�प�त्रा� क� ज�"चा अधि!क�र� क� संर्मक्ष उपस्थिस्थाता ही�� ही�ता� ब�ता�र सं�दै�शी सं�०-01/18-223निदै��क16/03/18क� ताहीता 223बटा�० र्म2 सं�दै�शी ��ज� गर्या� ।	x	x	Sd/-	Sd/-
22/03/18	बल सं�०135324015धिसंप�ही�/निबग�० संत्र्यार्म र्मही�प�त्रा� क� ज�"! अधि!क�र� क� संर्मक्ष उपस्थिस्थाता ही�कर अप��	x	x		Sd/-

¶41

7

¶42

	बचा�वा पक्ष र्म2 धिलधि3ता प्रनितावा�दै� र्या� बर्या�� दै�� क� धिलर्या� पत्रा सं�० ज�०दै�-01/2018-223-सं�शी�ल क�० शीर्म�� निदै��क22/03/18क� ताहीता पत्रा�चा�र ।
26/03/18	बल सं�०135324015धिसंप�ही�/निबग�० संत्र्यार्म र्मही�प�त्रा� क4 प्र�थानिर्मक सं�वा�ई क4 क�र्या�वा�ही� निकर्या� गर्या�।	x	Sd/-	Sd/-	Sd/-
28/03/18	बल सं�०135324015धिसंप�ही�/निबग�० संत्र्यार्म र्मही�प�त्रा� द्वा�र� आर�प स्वा�क�र कर�� अथावा� �ही7 कर�� क� सं�ब�! र्म2 सं�वा�ई क4 क�र्या�वा�ही� ।	x	Sd/-	Sd/-	Sd/-
29/03/18	बल सं�ख्र्या�850030168संउनि�/ज�डी� र�ज�न्द्र क�र्म�र सं�०एचा०एर्म० सं�/223बटा� क� ब्र्या�� एवा� प्रश्��त्तर ताथा� आर�प� क� द्वा�र� द्वा�र� बल सं�०850030168 संउनि� ज�डी� र�ज�न्द्र क�र्म�र सं�०एचा०एर्म० सं�/223 बटा� सं� निकर्या� गर्या� धिजरही क4 क�र्या�वा�ही� । प्रस्ता�निता अधि!क�र� द्वा�र� बल सं�ख्र्या�850030168संउनि�/ज�डी� र�ज�न्द्र क�र्म�र सं� प�छे� गर्या� प्रश्��त्तर।	Sd/-	Sd/-	Sd/-	Sd/-
30/03/18	बल सं�ख्र्या�041546275धिसंप�ही�/ज�डी� हीर�शी हीर�तावा�ल कम्प�� धिलनिपक सं�/223बटा� क� ब्र्या�� एवा� प्रश्��तार ताथा� आर�प� क� द्वा�र� बल सं�ख्र्या� 041546275धिसंप�ही�/ज�डी� हीर�शी हीर�तावा�ल कम्प�� धिलनिपक सं�/223बटा� सं� निकर्या� गर्या� धिजरही क4 क�र्या�वा�ही�। प्रस्ता�निता अधि!क�र� द्वा�र� बल सं�ख्र्या� 041546275धिसंप�ही�/ज�डी� हीर�शी हीर�तावा�ल सं� पBछे� गर्या� प्रश्��त्तर।	Sd/-	Sd/-	Sd/-	Sd/-
31/03/18	बल सं�ख्र्या�005010396नि�र�/ज�डी� संन्ता�ष धिसं�ही संर्मवा�र्या अधि!क�र� सं�/223बटा� क� बर्या�� एवा� प्रश्��तार ताथा� आर�प� क� द्वा�र� बल सं�ख्र्या� 005010396नि�र�/ज�डी� संन्ता�ष धिसं�ही संर्मवा�र्या अधि!क�र� सं�/223बटा�.सं� निकर्या� गर्या� धिजरही क4 क�र्या�वा�ही� वा प्रस्ता�निता अधि!क�र� द्वा�र� बल सं�ख्र्या� 006010396नि�र�/ज�डी� संन्ता�ष धिसं�ही सं� पBछे� गर्या� प्रश्��त्तर।	x	Sd/-	Sd/-	Sd/-
04/04/18	बल सं�०951300974हीवा/ज�डी� र्म�न्ना� र�र्म उप० प्रशी�० धिलनिपक223बटा� क� बर्या�� एवा� प्रश्��तार ताथा� आर�प� क� द्वा�र� बल सं�०951360974हीवा/ज�डी� र्म�न्ना� र�र्म उप० प्रशी�ळ धिलनिपक223बटा� सं� निकर्या� गर्या� धिजरही क4 क�र्या�वा�ही� । प्रस्ता�निता अधि!क�र� द्वा�र� बल सं�ख्र्या�951360974हीर्या/ज�डी� र्म�न्ना� र�र्म सं� पBछे� गर्या� प्रश्��त्तर।	Sd/-	Sd/-	Sd/-	Sd/-
05/04/18	्र््त बल सं�०:- 910040208हीवा/ज�डी� र�क�शी क�र्म�र ब�०एचा०एर्म०223बटा� क� बल सं�०135324015 धिसंप�ही�/निबग�० संत्र्यार्म र्मही�प�त्रा� क� निवारूद्ध निदैर्या� गर्या� बर्या�� एवा� प्रश्��तार ताथा� आर�प� क� द्वा�र� बल सं�०- 910040208हीवा/ज�डी� र�क�शी क�र्म�र ब�०एचा०एर्म० 223बटा� सं� निकर्या� गर्या� धिजरही । प्रस्ता�निता अधि!क�र�	Sd/-	Sd/-	Sd/-	Sd/-

¶43

8

¶44

	द्वा�र� बल सं�ख्र्या�910040208हीवा/ज�डी� र�क�शी क�र्म�र सं� प�छे� गर्या� प्रश्��त्तर।
06/04/18	बल सं�०035142013उप नि�र�/ज�डी� पवा� क�र्म�र दै�ब� उप नि�र� प्रशी�० क� बल सं�०135324015धिसंप�ही�/ निबग�० संत्र्यार्म र्मही�प�त्रा� क� निवारुद्ध निदैर्या� गर्या� बर्या�� एवा� प्रश्��तार ताथा� आर�प� क� द्वा�र� बल सं०035142013 उप नि�र�/ज�डी� पवा� क�र्म�र दै�ब� उप नि�र�.प्रशी�० सं� निकर्या� गर्या� धिजरही । प्रस्ता�निता अधि!क�र� द्वा�र� बल सं�ख्र्या� 035142013उप नि�र�/ज�डी� पवा� क�र्म�र दै�ब� सं� प�छे� गर्या� प्रश्��त्तर।	x	Sd/-	Sd/-	Sd/-
07/04/18	बल सं�०095341125हीवा/र्म�त्रा�० सं��ष क�र्म�र झा� स्था�०दै�-223बटा�० क�रिरप�बल क� ब्र्या�� एवा� प्रश्��तार ताथा� आर�प� क� द्वा�र� बल सं�०095341125हीर्या/र्म�त्रा�० सं��ष क�र्म�र झा� स्था�०दै�-223बटा�० सं� निकर्या� गर्या� धिजरही प्रस्ता�निता अधि!क�र� द्वा�र� बल सं�ख्र्या� 095341125हीवा/र्म�त्रा�० सं��ष क�र्म�र झा� सं� प�छे� गर्या� प्रश्��त्तर।	Sd/-	Sd/-	Sd/-	Sd/-
14/05/18	आज निदै��क14/05/18क� पत्रा सं�ख्र्या�-ज�-दै�- 01/2018-सं�शी�ल क� शीर्म�� निदै��क14/05/2018क� ताहीता आर�प� क� अप�� बचा�वा पक्ष र3�� ही�ताB15निदै� क� संर्मर्या निदैर्या� गर्या�	x	Sd/-	x	Sd/-
20/05/18	आज निदै��क20/05/18क� पत्रा सं�ख्र्या�-प�-आठ- 01/18-एसं०क�०शीर्म�� निदै��क20/05/18क� ताहीता निवा��ग�र्या ज� क� ब�र� र्म2 र्म�ख्र्या�लर्या क� अवागता करवा�र्या� गर्या�	x	x	x	Sd/-
27/05/18	आज निदै��क27/05/18क� पत्रा सं�-प�-आठ-01/18- संB.क�.ष.निदै��क27/05/18क� ताहीता र्म�ख्र्या�लर्या क� अवागता कर�र्या� गर्या� निक आर�प� क�निर्म�क बल सं�ख्र्या� 135324015धिसं./निबग� संत्र्यार्म र्मही�प�त्रा� क� बचा�वा पक्ष र3�� क� संर्मर्या निदै��क28/05/18क� संर्म�प्त ही� रही� ही� अताK आर�प� क�निर्म�क क� ज�"चा अधि!क�र� क� संर्मक्ष प्रस्ता�ता कर� ।	x	Sd/-	x	Sd/-
28/05/18	आज निदै��क28/05/18क� बल सं�ख्र्या�135324015 धिसं./निबग� संत्र्यार्म र्मही�प�त्रा� अप�� बचा�वा सं�ब�!� दैस्ता�वा�ज क� सं�था ज�"चा अधि!क�र� क� संर्मक्ष प्रस्ता�ता हीLआ।	x	Sd/-	x	Sd/-
29/05/18	आज निदै��क29/05/18क� बल सं�ख्र्या�135324015 धिसं/निबग� संत्र्यार्म र्मही�प�त्रा� क� बर्या�� एवा� प्रश्��त्तर	x	Sd/-	Sd/-	Sd/-
30/05/18	आज निदै��क30/05/18क� प्रस्ता�ता अधि!क�र� क� रिरप�टा� प्रस्ता�ता कर�� ही�ताB नि�दैMनिशीता निकर्या� गर्या�।	x	x	Sd/-	Sd/-
30/05/18	आज निदै��क31/05/18क� प्रस्ता�निता अधि!क�र� द्वा�र� अप�� रिरप�टा� प्रस्ता�ता क4 गई	x	x	Sd/-	Sd/-
31/05/18	आज निदै��क31/05/18क� अनि�र्या�क्त क� उपर लग�र्या� गर्या� उपब�! एक एवा� दै� क� र्मदै एर्म दै� एवा� ता�� र्म2 लग�र्या�	x	Sd/-	Sd/-	Sd/-

¶45

9

¶46

	गर्या� आर�पN क� स्वा�क�र एवा� अस्वा�क�र कर�� क� सं�ब�! र्म2 ज� अधि!क�र� द्वा�र� पBछे� गर्या� संवा�ल-जवा�ब ।
01/06/18	ज�"चा अधि!क�र� द्वा�र� ज�र� निवा��ग�र्या ज�"चा क4 रिरप�टा�	x	x	x	Sd/-
01/06/18	ज�"चा अधि!क�र� क� नि�ष्कष� एवा� र�र्या	x	x	x	Sd/-

¶47

From perusal of the proceedings of the departmental enquiry, it further transpires that there is an acknowledgment of the petitioner with respect to receiving the documents during the departmental enquiry proceedings and the statement of the witnesses. It also transpires that when the opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses was given to the petitioner, he refused to cross-examine the witnesses. From perusal of the entire record of the departmental enquiry, it further transpires that sufficient opportunity was provided to the petitioner in the departmental enquiry, and he has not made any application or objection that he has not been provided any opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses or supply of any document. Even from the statement of the petitioner recorded on 29.05.2018, which is available in the records of the departmental enquiry, it transpires that without informing anyone, he had gone to his house on his own and had not made any communication to the authorities, he received the article of charges. He also admitted that sufficient opportunity was provided to him in departmental enquiry proceedings to put up his case, take the assistance of defence, but he did not take any assistance. From the record of departmental enquiry proceedings, it is quite vivid that the petitioner had appeared in the departmental proceedings till its completion, and despite being given an opportunity, he refused to accept the defence assistant.

¶48

There is no explanation from the petitioner with respect to his

¶49

10

¶50

unauthorized absence from 13.07.2017 to 20.02.2018. The warrant of arrest was issued against the petitioner on 05.09.2017, and he was declared a deserter on 25.01.2018 as he remained absent from his duty without any intimation or sanctioned leave. The desertion of the force is a punishable offence as provided under Section 9(f) of the CRPF Act, 1949, and Section 11 provides the punishment. The two following charges have been found proved against the petitioner:-

¶51

- एक “ रद ्म ै

¶52

र्याही ही� निक बल सं�ख्र्या� 135324015 धिसंप�ही�/ निबग�लर संत्र्यार्म र्मही�प�त्रा�, सं�/223 बटा�धिलर्या� क�.रिर.प�.बल �� धिसंप�ही�/निबग�लर क� पदै पर क�र्या�रता रहीता� हीLर्या� क�.रिर.प�.बल अधि!नि�र्यार्म 1949 क4 !�र�-11 (1) क� अन्ताग�ता बल क� संदैस्र्या ही�� क4 ही�धिसंर्याता सं� अ��शी�सं�ही��ता� / अवाता�र एवा� कदै�चा�र क� अपर�! निकर्या� ही�, धिजसंर्म2 क�निर्म�क क� निदै��क 12/07/17 क� स्वार्या� क� ईल�ज क� धिलए 65 -बटा�धिलर्या� क� रिरप�बल र�र्याप�र ��ज� गर्या� था� ल�निक� क�निर्म�क 65 बटा�धिलर्या� र्म2 रिरप�टा� �ही7 निकर्या� और निदै��क 13/07/17 सं� बर�स्ता� संक्षर्म प्र�धि!क�र� क अ��र्मनिता क� निब�� ड्यूBटा� सं� अ��पस्थिस्थाता चाल रही� ही� ज� निक क�०रिर०प�०बल क� आदैशीS�/नि�र्यार्मN क� धि3ल�फ ही� और क�न्द्र�र्या रिरजवा� प�धिलसं बल अधि!नि�र्यार्म 1949 क4 !�र� 11 [1] क� सं�था पनिठता क�रिरप�बल नि�र्यार्म�वाल�, 1955 क� नि�र्यार्म 27 क� ताहीता दैण्डी��र्या अपर�! ही�।

¶53

- रद ्म ै � द ै

¶54

र्याही निक बल सं�ख्र्या� 135324015 धिसंप�ही�/निबग�लर संत्र्यार्म र्मही�प�त्रा�, सं�/223 बटा�धिलर्या� क�.रिर.प�.वाल �� धिसंप�ही�/निबग�लर क� पदै पर क�र्या�रता रहीता� हीLए बल क� संदैस्र्या ही�� क4 ही�धिसंर्याता सं� क�.रिर.प�.बल अधि!नि�र्यार्म 1949 क4 !�र� 11 (1) क� अ!�� वारिरष्ठ अधि!क�रिरर्याN क� आदै�शीN क4 अवाही�ल�� /अवाज्ञा� कर�� क� अपर�! पBवा� र्म2 �� निकर्या� ही�, धिजसंक� अन्ताग�ता क�निर्म�क निब�� निकसं� संक्षर्म प्र�धि!क�र क� अवाक�शी सं� निदै��क 14/01/15 सं� 20/02/15 ताक क�ल 38 निदै�, निदै��क 25/04/15 सं� 26/04/15 ताक क�ल 02 निदै�, निदै��क 02/02/17 सं� 06/02/17 ताक क�ल 05 निदै� एवा� निदै��क 22/04/17 सं� 18/05/17 ताक क�ल 27 निदै� अवाक�शी सं� ग�रही�धिजर रही� ही�, इसंसं� प्रता�ता ही�ता� ही� निक क�निर्म�क अवाक�शी सं� ग�रही�धिजर ही�� क� आदै� ही� ज� निक बल क� आदैशीS/ नि�र्यार्मN क� धि3ल�फ ही� ताथा� क�रिरप�बल अधि!नि�र्यार्म 1949 क4 !�र� 11 (1) क� सं�था पनिठता क�रिरप�बल नि�र्यार्म�वाल�, 1955 क� नि�र्यार्म 27 क� ताहीता दैण्डी��र्या ही�।”

¶55

11

¶56

It also transpires from the order dated 04.12.2020 (Annexure P/2) that the departmental appeal filed by the petitioner against the impugned order of his removal from service dated 20.06.2018 has been elaborately considered by the appellate authority, and a detailed and reasoned order has been passed affirming the removal order of the petitioner from service. The petitioner has also availed the remedy of revision as provided under Rule 29 of the CRPF Rules, 1955, which has also been considered by the revisional authority, and a reasoned order has been passed on 18.06.2021 dismissing the revision filed by the petitioner. The order of removal of the petitioner from service has been concurrently upheld by the appellate and revisional authorities by passing a detailed and reasoned order considering all the aspects of the case, factually as well as legally. In para 8.1 and 8.2 of the order dated 04-12-2020, passed in departmental appeal, the appellate authority held that:-

¶57

“1. र्या�निचाक�कता�� क� स्वार्या� क� ईल�ज क� धिलए 223 बटा�धिलर्या� सं� निदै��क 12/07/2017 क� 65 बटा�धिलर्या� फ�रिरप�बल, र�र्याप�र ��ज� गर्या�। र्या�निचाक�कता�� 65 बटा�धिलर्या� र्म2 रिरप�टा� �ही7 निकर्या� ताथा� स्वार्या� क4 र्मजZ सं� �ग[ड़ा� ही� गर्या�।

¶58

कर्म�ण्डी�टा 223 बटा�धिलर्या� क� पत्रा सं�० डीब्लB दै�. 1/2017-223-स्था�-दै� निदै� क 05/09/2017 क� ताहीता र्या�निचाक�कता�� क� निगरफ्ता�र कर�� क� धिलए निगरफP ता�र� वा�र�टा प�धिलसं अधि!क्षक धिजल� र�र्यागढ़ (छे०१०) क� ��ज� गर्या� ल�निक� उक्त निगरफP ता�र� वा�र�टा क4 ता�र्म�ल �ही7 ही� प�था�। निगरफP ता�र� वा�र�टा ज�र� ही�� क� उपर��ता �� र्या�निचाक�कता�� ता� ड्यूBटा� पर उपस्थिस्थाता हीLआ और � ही� क�ई पत्रा�चा�र निकर्या�।”

¶59

Now comes the next question as to the scope of interference by the High Court while entertaining a petition dealing with disciplinary proceedings. It is a settled position of law that the High Court, in exercise of its writ jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the

¶60

12

¶61

Constitution of India, has very minimal powers to interfere with a disciplinary proceeding, particularly when it has been conducted after a full-fledged departmental enquiry. The High Court cannot substitute itself as an Appellate Authority to a disciplinary proceeding, nor can the High Court go into the entire evidence and re-appreciate the same and reach a different conclusion. When the inquiry report is based on the evidence which have been adduced by the parties during the inquiry proceedings. Under such circumstances, the High Court cannot further go into the adequacy of evidence or the reliability of the evidence.

¶62

Hon’ble Supreme Court in this regard in the case of “ S. R. Tewari Vs. Union of India ”, (2013) 6 SCC 602 in paragraphs 19, 20 & 21 have held as under:-

¶63

“19. In the case of CIT v. Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd., AIR 1984 SC 1182, this Court held that various parameters of the court’s power of judicial review of administrative or executive action on which the court can interfere had been well settled and it would be redundant to recapitulate the whole catena of decisions. The Court further held:

¶64

“11. ....It is a settled position that if the action or decision is perverse or is such that no reasonable body of persons, properly informed, could come to, or has been arrived at by the authority misdirecting itself by adopting a wrong approach, or has been influenced by irrelevant or extraneous matters the court would be justified in interfering with the same.”

¶65

20. The court can exercise the power of judicial review if there is a manifest error in the exercise of power or the exercise of power is manifestly arbitrary or if the power is exercised on the basis of facts which do not

¶66

13

¶67

exist and which are patently erroneous. Such exercise of power would stand vitiated. The court may be justified in exercising the power of judicial review if the impugned order suffers from mala fide, dishonest or corrupt practices, for the reason, that the order had been passed by the authority beyond the limits conferred upon the authority by the legislature. Thus, the court has to be satisfied that the order had been passed by the authority only on the grounds of illegality, irrationality and procedural impropriety before it interferes. The court does not have the expertise to correct the administrative decision. Therefore, the court itself may be fallible and interfering with the order of the authority may impose heavy administrative burden on the State or may lead to unbudgeted expenditure. (Vide: Tata Cellular v. Union of India, AIR 1996 SC 11; People’s Union for Civil Liberties & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors., AIR 2004 SC 456; and State of N.C.T. of Delhi & Anr. v. Sanjeev alias Bittoo, AIR 2005 SC 2080).”

¶68

21. In Air India Ltd. v. Cochin International Airport Ltd., AIR (2000) SC 801, this Court explaining the scope of judicial review held that the court must act with great caution and should exercise such power only in furtherance to public interest and not merely on the making out of a legal point. The court must always keep the larger public interest in mind in order to decide whether its intervention is called for or not.”

¶69

A similar view has also been taken by the Supreme Court in the case of Sanjay Kumar Singh Vs. Union of India & Ors., AIR 2012 SC 1783 and also in the case of Union of India & Others Vs. Bodupalli Gopalaswami, (2011) 13 SCC 553, wherein the Supreme Court has in a very categorical terms held that in departmental enquiry proceedings the scope of Court's are very limited. It has been reiterated by the Supreme Court that in a disciplinary proceeding matters the Courts cannot substitute its own finding by replacing the finding arrived at by

¶70

14

¶71

the authority that too after detailed appreciation of the evidence brought on record. It has been repeatedly held by the Supreme Court that under Article 226 of Constitution, the High Court does not sit as an appellate authority over the findings of the disciplinary authority as also the appellate authority. It has also been repeatedly held by the Supreme Court that the High Court under Article 226 would not reappreciate the entire evidence and come to a different and independent finding.

¶72

A similar view also has been taken by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India & Others Vs. P. Gunasekaran, (2015) 2 SCC 610, For ready reference paragraph 12, 13 and 15 of the said judgment reproduced hereinunder:-

¶73

“12. In disciplinary proceedings, the High Court is not and cannot act as a second court of first appeal. The High Court, in exercise of its powers under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, shall not venture into reappreciation of the evidence. The High Court can only see whether:

¶74

a. the enquiry is held by a competent authority;

¶75

b. the enquiry is held according to the procedure prescribed in that behalf;

¶76

c. there is violation of the principles of natural justice in conducting the proceedings;

¶77

d. the authorities have disabled themselves from reaching a fair conclusion by some considerations extraneous to the evidence and merits of the case;

¶78

e. the authorities have allowed themselves to be influenced by irrelevant or extraneous considerations;

¶79

15

¶80

f. the conclusion, on the very face of it, is so wholly arbitrary and capricious that no reasonable person could ever have arrived at such conclusion;

¶81

g. the disciplinary authority had erroneously failed to admit the admissible and material evidence;

¶82

h. the disciplinary authority had erroneously admitted inadmissible evidence which influenced the finding;

¶83

i. the finding of fact is based on no evidence.

¶84

13. Under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the High Court shall not:

¶85

(i). re-appreciate the evidence;

¶86

(ii). interfere with the conclusions in the enquiry, in case the same has been conducted in accordance with law;

¶87

(iii). go into the adequacy of the evidence; (iv). go into the reliability of the evidence;

¶88

(v). interfere, if there be some legal evidence on which findings can be based.

¶89

(vi). correct the error of fact however grave it may appear to be; (vii). go into the proportionality of punishment unless it shocks its conscience.

¶90

The Hon'ble Supreme Court dealing with the same issue in the case of “State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur v. Nemi Chand Nalwaya” reported in 2011 (4) SCC 584 in paragraph No.7 held as under:

¶91

7. It is now well settled that the courts will not act as an appellate court and reassess the evidence led in the domestic enquiry, nor interfere on the ground that another view is possible on the material on record. If the enquiry has been fairly and properly held and

¶92

16

¶93

the findings are based on evidence, the question of adequacy of the evidence or the reliable nature of the evidence will not be grounds for interfering with the findings in departmental enquiries. Therefore, courts will not interfere with findings of fact recorded in departmental enquiries, except where such findings are based on no evidence or where they are clearly perverse. The test to find out perversity is to see whether a tribunal acting reasonably could have arrived at such conclusion or finding, on the material on record. Courts will however interfere with the findings in disciplinary matters, if principles of natural justice or statutory regulations have been violated or if the order is found to be arbitrary, capricious, mala fide or based on extraneous considerations. (vide B. C. Chaturvedi -Versus- Union of India – 1995 (6) SCC 749, Union of India vs. G. Gunayuthan – 1997 (7) SCC 463, and Bank of India -VersusDegala Suryanarayana – 1999 (5) SCC 762, High Court of Judicature at Bombay vs. Shahsi Kant S Patil– 2001 (1) SCC 416).”

¶94

Once the law is settled that in disciplinary proceedings, unless there is a ground of perversity or the finding is contrary to the evidence on record or there is a technical flaw in the conducting of the departmental enquiry, the Court should be slow in interfering with such findings which are based on evidence which has come on record.

¶95

The police force is a disciplined force and shoulders the great responsibility of maintaining law and order and public order in society. People repose great faith and confidence, and the person who joins the force must be a person of utmost rectitude. The term 'discipline' does not mean being disciplined during working hours, particularly when they belong to a uniformed force. The conduct of a member of a

¶96

17

¶97

uniformed force, or for that matter, a police officer, also has to be disciplined even when he is not on duty hours. The society expects from the police personnel or person from the uniformed force to ensure that the public order is maintained in the highest, and that is expected of them even when they are not discharging their official duties.

¶98

From closed scrutiny of the documents as well as pleadings of the parties, this Court do not find any scope of interference in the impugned orders passed by respondent authorities, by which the petitioner has been removed from service and his appeal and revision have been dismissed.

¶99

Accordingly, the present writ petition is devoid of merit and is hereby dismissed .

¶100

Sd/(Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge

¶101

ved

Satyam Mahapatra v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satyam Mahapatra v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rohit Bhalla Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Suresh Prasad Vs State of Chhattisgarh

M/S Sai Info Services, Vs Shri Ajeet Vasant

Pranav Kumar Garg Vs Manoj Kumar Pingua IAS

Lalaram Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ashish Kumar Vs Niva Bupa Health Insurance Company