Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Suresh Kumar Kait, Poonam A. Bamba, JJ.
Devendra Singh – Appellant
Versus
Union of India & Ors. – Respondents
W.P.(C) 4066 of 2023 & CM APPL. 15871 of 2023 (exemption)
Decided On : 29-03-2023
Certiorari - Compulsory Retirement - The court disposed of the petition by giving liberty to the petitioner to file a revision petition and directed the respondents to decide the same within four weeks, considering the mental condition of the petitioner and passing the order on humanitarian grounds.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought quashing of the punishment order for compulsory retirement and the appeal against it, as well as the charge sheet and proceedings arising from it. The petitioner also sought reinstatement with consequential benefits or alternative pensions, and disciplinary action against other respondents for harassment.
Finding of the Court:
The court disposed of the petition by allowing the petitioner to file a revision petition and directed the respondents to consider the mental condition of the petitioner and pass the order on humanitarian grounds.
Issues: The maintainability of the petition due to the absence of a revision petition and the direct approach to the court by the petitioner.
Ratio Decidendi: The court allowed the petitioner to file a revision petition and directed the respondents to consider the mental condition of the petitioner and pass the order on humanitarian grounds.
Final Decision: The petition was disposed of with the liberty given to the petitioner to file a revision petition and with directions to the respondents to consider the mental condition of the petitioner and pass the order on humanitarian grounds.
JUDGMENT (Oral)
1. Vide the present petition, petitioner prays as under:
i) Issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction thereby quashing and setting aside the impugned punishment order dated 05.07.2022 vide which petitioner has been compulsory retired from the service as well as order dated 07.02.2023 vide which appeal of the petitioner against the impugned punishment order dated 05.07.2022;
ii) Issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction thereby quashing and setting aside the Charge Sheet dated 07.02.2023 as well as the Proceedings arising therefrom it;
iii) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction thereby directing respondents to reinstate the petitioner forthwith with all consequential benefits or in alternative grant petitioner Invalid pension in terms of Rule 39 & 44 of CCS Pension Rule 2021 read with Rule 91 B of the Central Industrial Security Force Rules 2001 as well as disability pension;
iv) Or in alternative Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction thereby directing respondents to treat this Writ Petition as Review Petition under Section 9 of the Central Industrial Security Force Act, 1968 read with Rule 54 of Central Industrial Security Force Rules, 2001 and decide the same within period of 4 weeks;
v) Issue a Writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction thereby directing respondents to take disciplinary action against Respondent No. 05 & 06 for harassing the Petitioner, a subordinate, in the disciplined force "CISF";
2. Notice issued.
3. Learned counsel for respondents accepts notice and has raised preliminary issue that no revision petition has been preferred by the petitioner, however, the petitioner has approached this Court directly. Thus, the present petition is not maintainable.
4. In view of above, we hereby dispose of the present petition by giving liberty to the petitioner to file a revision petition and on receipt of the same, respondents are directed to decide the same within four weeks thereafter and communicate the decision thereof to the petitioner within one week thereafter with reasoned order. While passing the order, the respondents shall consider the mental condition of petitioner and pass the order on humanitarian ground.
5. With the aforesaid directions, the present petition is disposed of.
The court has the discretion to dispose of a petition by allowing the petitioner to file a revision petition and directing the respondents to consider the mental condition of the petitioner and pass ....
The punishment of compulsory retirement was disproportionate to the gravity of the offense of having excess pocket money.
Limited scope of interference in departmental enquiries unless there is perversity writ large on the face of the proceedings or gross violation of principles of natural justice.
The judgment establishes that there is no provision for filing an appeal/application against the order of revision, and the petitioner can challenge the final order by way of revision before the conc....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the importance of discipline and hierarchical structure in uniformed services, particularly in cases involving assault on a senior officer.
The main legal point established is that an employee is entitled to pension and post-retiral benefits as per the initial order of compulsory retirement, and subsequent amendments denying such benefit....
Disciplinary authority's decision upheld due to adherence to procedural fairness and proportionality of punishment to misconduct.
Termination upheld as lawful due to prolonged unauthorized absence and failure to substantiate claims of illness, despite claims of procedural violations.
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
