Back
MANMOHAN, ASHA MENON
Force No065180927 Ex Ct Wm Bachhu Singh – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India And Ors – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Manmohan, J. - Present writ petition has been filed challenging the orders dated 09th June 2018, 18th January 2020 and 21st August 2020 passed by the Commandant Group Centre, CRPF, Bhopal, DIG Group Centre, CRPF, Bhopal and DIGP (Adm.) CZ Kolkata whereby the Petitioner was awarded punishment of compulsory retirement from service. Petitioner also seeks reinstatement with back wages and consequential benefits since 09th June 2018.
2. Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that the Petitioner was a CT/WM in the CRPF who has filed a divorce petition against his first wife in the District Court Mathura which is pending before the concerned court in which the Petitioner s previous wife has been proceeded ex-parte.
3. He also states that in view of the special customs applicable to the petitioner, he is entitled to divorce from his first wife. He further submits that under Proviso to Rule 21(2) of CCS Conduct Rules, 1964 the petitioner who is a Government servant has only to inform the Central Government that he has married again during subsistence of his first marriage by virtue of personal law applicable to him. Rules 21(1) and (2) of Rules, 1964 are reproduced hereinbelow:-
"2
Violation of CCS Conduct Rules by marrying again during the subsistence of the first marriage, and the lack of evidence to support the petitioner's claim of entitlement to marry under special customs....
A government servant violating marriage conduct rules without obtaining necessary permissions is subject to disciplinary actions including compulsory retirement.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the need for proportionality in the punishment imposed for violations of service rules, considering the individual circumstances and the impact on ....
Government servants must adhere to conduct rules prohibiting bigamous marriages, requiring prior approval regardless of personal law or spousal consent.
The court ruled that while misconduct was established, the punishment of compulsory retirement was excessive and disproportionate, warranting judicial intervention.
penalty of removal from service on that ground was not shockingly disproportionate to charge on established judicial parameters. In view of the aforesaid decision, the judgment relied on by the petit....
Misconduct - When the whole situation is examined in the light of the Conduct Rules of 1965, then petitioner’s contention that she is second wife and is entitled to family pension is not made out bec....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
