The case of the petitioner is that the charge No.1 as framed against the petitioner vide memorandum dated May 29, 2023, clearly depicts that the same is for an alleged misconduct committed prior to four years on the date of issuance of chargesheet and the petitioner having retired, the respondents cannot frame such a charge against the petitioner. In this regard, Mr. Bhardwaj has relied upon Rule 8(2)(c)(ii) of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 2021. In other words, it is his submission that if the respondents want to proceed against the petitioner, the charge necessarily has to be against a misconduct committed within four years from the date of alleged incident. Mr. Bhardwaj in this regard has also drawn our attention to the charge itself to contend that charge being that the petitioner while functioning as Deputy Inspector General, CISF, NZ II, from March 01, 2019 to January 17, 2020 issued posting order dated April 04, 2019 in respect of HC/GD Ravi Ji Bhat from SHEP Salal to NFL Bhatinda, which is in violation of letter dated December 28, 2018. According to him, the issuance of order dated April 04, 2019 which at the most construed as a misconduct on the part of the petitioner being beyond four years on the date of issuance of chargesheet, the same cannot be a subject matter of charge.
