Disposed

Cisf No. 170730022 Arup Kumar Medhi v. the Union of India and 4 Ors.

Gauhati HC8 Apr 2024WP(C)/950/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging a removal from service order in the CISF. Noting the petitioner failed to seek revision against the appellate authority's order, the Court reserved and then dismissed the petition, granting liberty to approach the superior revisional authority under Rule 54 of CISF Rules, 2001 within 30 days.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; liberty granted to the petitioner to file a revision under Rule 54 of CISF Rules, 2001 within 30 days.

Cisf No. 170730022 Arup Kumar Medhi Vs the… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Gauhati HC (2024)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010024012021

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/950/2021

¶5

CISF NO. 170730022 ARUP KUMAR MEDHI S/O SIB CHARAN MEDHI

¶6

R/O TULUNGIA PART I, PO NORTH SALMARA, PS ABHAYAPURI DIST BONGAIGAON, ASSAM

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE UNION OF INDIA AND 4 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, GOVT. OF INDIA, NEW DELHI 110001

¶9

2:THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF CISF NORTH ZONE MAHIPALPUR NEW DELHI 110037

¶10

3:THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF CISF

¶11

NORTH ZONE - I MAHIPALPUR NEW DELHI 110037

¶12

4:THE COMMANDANT CISF 6TH RB (DEOLI) RAJASTHAN 304804

¶13

5:THE COMMANDER

¶14

CISF 106 COMPANY (NRC ASSAM) ABHAYAPURI BATTALION GATE BONGAIGAON ASSAM

¶15

Page No.# 2/3

¶16

78338

¶17

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M A ISLAM

¶18

Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I.

¶19

BEFORE

¶20

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. SEMA

¶21

ORDER

¶22

Date : 09-04-2024

¶23

The present writ petition was filed impugning the Final Order dated 05.06.2020 passed by the Commandant, CISF, 6^th RB, Deoli, District Tonk, Rajasthan, imposing the major penalty of removal from service against the petitioner and the impugned Order dated 18.10.2020 passed by the DIG, NZ-1, New Delhi, the appellate authority, rejecting the appeal of the petitioner and upholding the impugned removal order of the Disciplinary Authority.

¶24

The learned counsel for the parties were heard on 12.03.2024 and the judgment and order was kept reserved.

¶25

This Court had, however, observed that the petitioner has not taken recourse to revision against the Order of the appellate authority as provided under Rule 54 of the CISF Rules, 2001. The matter was, therefore, directed to be listed again on 09.04.2024.

¶26

Mr. M.A. Islam, learned counsel appeared for the petitioner and Mr. U.K. Goswami, learned Assistant ASGI appeared for the Union respondents.

¶27

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and as consented by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the writ petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to take recourse to the provisions of revision as provided for under Rule 54 of the CISF Rules, 2001 against the Order dated 08.10.2020

¶28

Page No.# 3/3

¶29

passed by the DIG, NZ-1, New Delhi (appellate authority) before the authority superior to the appellate authority.

¶30

The petitioner shall approach the revisional authority contemplated under Rule 54 of the CISF Rules, 2001 within a period of 30 (thirty) days from the date of passing of this Order.

¶31

Writ petition accordingly stands disposed.

¶32

The Registry is directed to immediately transmit the records of WP(C)/950/2021 to the Principal Seat.

¶33

Comparing Assistant

Cisf No. 170730022 Arup Kumar Medhi v. the Union of India and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Cisf No. 170730022 Arup Kumar Medhi v. the Union of India and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jonali Das Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Jonali Barman and 2 Ors. Vs Union of India and 3 Ors.

Achyut Deka Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Bharat Basumatary Vs MD Rekibul Choudhury and 2 Ors.

Cholamandalam Ms General Insurance Company Ltd. Vs Rupanjali Barua @ Dipti Baruah Ad 2 Ors.

Kishore Das Vs M/S Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. and Anr.