This petition challenged the removal of the petitioner from CISF service for unauthorized leave and failure to join duty. The court dismissed the writ petition, holding that the petitioner was guilty of severe delay and laches in exhausting statutory remedies and approaching the court.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~4
+ Date of Decision: 3.07.2019
% W.P.(C.) No. 6136/2019
DURGESH S. KOTHEKAR ..... Petitioner Through: Ms. Kajal Bhatia, Adv. with Mr. A. Karthik, Adv.
Versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Kamal Kant Jha, Adv. with Mr. Siddharth Jha and Ms. Bakshi Vinit, Advs.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNISH BHATNAGAR
RAJNISH BHATNAGAR, J. (ORAL)
“a) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari under Article 226 of the Constitution of India calling for records of Order of Removal dated 31.05.2012 and set aside and quash the same;
b) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India directing the Respondents to reinstate the Petitioner on account of disproportionate punishment with all consequential benefits.”
Page 1 of 8
W.P.(C.) No.6136/2019
“ Article of Charge-I :
On account of failure to report on 20.09.2011, petitioner was charged with gross misconduct, indiscipline and unbecoming of member of a disciplined force like CISF.
Article of Charge-II:
On account of failure to report on duty on 07.09.2011 in „C” shift from 2100 hours to 0500 hours at Sub Officer‟s Hostel Duty Post, and on 08.09.2011 in “B” shift from 1300 hours to 2100 hours at Dog Kennel Duty Post, which amounted to gross misconduct, indiscipline and unbecoming of a disciplined force like CISF.
Article of Charge_III :
Petitioner was declared as an habitual offender as he has been awarded the following 1 major and 3 minor punishments :
Page 2 of 8
W.P.(C.) No.6136/2019
Page 3 of 8
W.P.(C.) No.6136/2019
leave period. Aggrieved by the order dated 31.05.2012, the petitioner preferred an appeal to the DIG (NEZS) Kolkata on 13.07.2012 and the appellate authority vide its order dated 19.09.2012 dismissed the appeal.
Page 4 of 8
W.P.(C.) No.6136/2019
this is a case of unauthorized period of over stay leave of 255 days and the punishment of removal awarded to the petitioner is commensurate with his misconduct, since there have been several earlier instances of unauthorized absenceas noticed in the charge memorandum. He further urged that the petitioner has failed to appear in the inquiry despite several opportunities. He further urged that the petition is liable to be dismissed on account of delay and latches.
Page 5 of 8
W.P.(C.) No.6136/2019
01-04-2012, through registered post AD, but he again did not appear before the enquiry officer despite having knowledge of the same.
Page 6 of 8
W.P.(C.) No.6136/2019
disposal of the writ petition. It is not understood, as to for what reason the petitioner waited for about one and a half year for filing the revision petition.
Page 7 of 8
W.P.(C.) No.6136/2019
misconduct. The petition is, therefore, dismissed.
RAJNISH BHATNAGAR, J.
VIPIN SANGHI, J.
JULY 03, 2019 sumant
Page 8 of 8
W.P.(C.) No.6136/2019
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner's appeal to the court can be entertained when there has been unexplained delay and laches.
Whether the punishment of removal from service was disproportionate to the charge of unauthorized leave.
Durgesh S. Kothekar
Union of India
Rajnish Bhatnagar
VIPIN SANGHI
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution asking a High Court to issue a writ against the State or a public authority in a civil matter.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
