Dominica Tirkey Vs the Union of India through Home Secretary Ministry of Home Affairs

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

W.P.(S) No. 106 of 2023

Dominica Tirkey, Aged – 55 years, wife of Shri Ambrose Tirkey, Inspector (Ministerial), Resident of Village – Manoharpur, P.O. P.S. – Kersai, - Tainser, District – Simdega, Jharkhand and presently working at TC & S, BSF, Hazaribagh, P.O. & P.S. – Muffassil Thana, Hazaribagh, District – Hazaribagh, Jharkhand – 825317

¶4

… … Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The Union of India, through – Home Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, North Block, Central Secretariat, New Delhi, P.O. Secretariat – North S.O. 110001 P.S. Central Secretariate

¶7

The Director General, Boarder Security force, CGO Complex, Lodhi Road, P.O. and P.S. – Lodhi Road, New Delhi

¶8

Inspector General, TC & S, BSF, Hazaribagh, P.O. – Meru, P.S. Mafasil thana Hazaribagh, District – Hazaribagh, Jharkhand – 825317

¶9

Commandant / Troops, TC & S, BSF, Hazaribagh, P.O. – Meru, P.S. Mafasil Thana Hazaribagh, District – Hazaribagh, Jharkhand - 825317 … … Respondents

¶10

¶11

CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

¶12

¶13

For the Petitioner : Mr. A. Allam, Senior Advocate For the Respondents : Mrs. Chandana Kumari, Advocate

¶14

¶15

06 /07.03.2024 Learned counsels for the parties are present.

¶16

2. This writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:

¶17

“a. For issuance of an appropriate writ/writs, order/orders, direction /directions or writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the order of punishment of severe reprimand which was passed in L.No. 622 - 23, Dated 28.02.2022, whereby and whereunder the learned Commandant/Troops has not issued any show-cause nor proper chargesheet nor the regular enquiry was made and out of sudden the punishment order of severe reprimand has been pronounced vide Order dated 28.02.2022 (copy not served), which is nonest in the eyes of law and liable to be set aside.

¶18

b. The respondents may be show- caused as to why the punishment of severe reprimand has been passed arbitrarily even without serving copy of reprimand order. Accordingly, for the harassment and torture of the punishment, the petitioner may also be compensated. Since the order of severe reprimand seriously prejudices case of the petitioner in the matter of promotion and further upgrading in the pay scale, so such punishment without going into the regular enquiry and that too passed by the unauthorized person jurisdiction, having no jurisdiction, the same is liable to be quashed.

¶19

c. To hold and declare that since the appointing authority and the disciplinary authority is the Inspector General (TC & S), BSF, Hazaribagh, so the punishment order passed by the Commandant, who are two grade below the post, cannot be sustained in the eyes of law as it is without jurisdiction. AND/OR

¶20

2

¶21

d. Pass other order(s) as this Hon'ble Court may deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

¶22

3. Learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that the petitioner has efficacious alternative remedy of appeal and, therefore, this writ petition may not be entertained.

¶23

4. At this, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has challenged the jurisdiction of the disciplinary authority and, therefore, this writ petition may be entertained. The learned counsel also submits that even the punishment was suggested by the inquiry officer and he had no jurisdiction to suggest any punishment.

¶24

5. After hearing the learned counsels for the parties and considering the nature of relief sought for in this writ petition, this Court is of the considered view that point of jurisdiction will itself be a mixed question of fact and law and the appellate authority has the jurisdiction to examine such issues along with the attending facts.

¶25

6. Accordingly, this court is not inclined to proceed any further in this writ petition as the petitioner has efficacious remedy of appeal. This writ petition is disposed of enabling the petitioner to file the appeal within a period of one month from today. It will be open to the petitioner to raise all the points which have been raised in this writ petition.

¶26

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)

¶27

Saurav

Dominica Tirkey v. the Union of India through Home Secretary Ministry of Home Affairs

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dominica Tirkey v. the Union of India through Home Secretary Ministry of Home Affairs

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sanjay Kumar Alias Sanjay Sao Alias Sanjay Sao Kanhu Vs the State of Jharkhand

Asha Prakash Vs the State of Jharkhand through Secretary Deptt of School Education and Literacy Development

Jharkhand State Electricity Bo Vs M/S K.Y.S.Manufacturers And Exp

Manu Manjhi Vs Central Coalfields Limited

Suchit Pandit Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Chief Secretary

Niraj Kumar Das Vs the State of Jharkhand