JUDGMENT

Anil Kumar, J.

CM No.17479/2011

Allowed subject to all just exceptions.

WP(C) No.7716/2011

1. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 15th February, 2006 and order dated 30th June, 2007 imposing major penalty on the petitioner of "reduction of pay by three stages from Rs.3800 to 3575/- in the time scale of pay of Rs.3050-75-3950-80-4590/- for a period of 2 years with further directions that the petitioner will not earn increment of pay during the period of reduction and that on expiry of this period, the reduction will have the effect of postponing his future increments of pay."

2. The petitioner was appointed as a constable in Central Industrial Security Force on 28th June, 1988 and was on deputation with Delhi Administration Police, New Delhi on September, 2001. The petitioner contended that Central Industrial Security Force is under the Ministry of Home Affairs having its headquarter at New Delhi and Deputy Inspector General is one of the subordinate officers and he was the appellate authority of the petitioner.

3. According to the allegations of the petitioner he had underwent treatment from 20th May, 2004 upto 23rd March, 2005 for multiple diseases in Central Government Health Scheme Dispensary, Kingsway Camp, New Delhi. The petitioner had applied for leave under Central Civil Service (Medical Attendance) Rules, 1944 on account of his various ailments. He also produced medical certificates issued by doctor/medical attendants for grant of leave. The petitioner was declared fit by the doctors to assume duty and thereafter the petitioner was repatriated to his parent department by movement order dated 23rd March, 2005 from Delhi Police and he joined the duty with Central Industrial Security Force, Headquarter on 24th March, 2005.

4. On repatriation to the Central Industrial Security Force petitioner was posted to F.B.P., Farakka. The petitioner was issued a memorandum of charge dated 14th June, 2005 framing three Article of Charges for the alleged misconduct and indiscipline on the part of the petitioner. According to the article of charge issued against the petitioner he was relieved from Delhi Armed Police with effect from 28th May, 2004 and he was to report to his parent department, however, he remained absent unauthorisedly for 299 days from 29th May, 2004 upto 23rd March, 205 without any intimation to the respondents or permission from the competent authority and thus committed a gross misconduct and an act of indiscipline. The other article of charge against the petitioner was that with effect from 29th March, 2005 when he was relieved from CISF Unit, Farakka after availing the eligible joining time he was to report to the Unit on 11th April, 2005 but he failed to do so and reported to the Unit after one day. The third charge made against the petitioner was that he submitted medical certificates bearing No.205478 dated nil, No.359919 dated nil, No.359920 dated nil, No.359921 dated nil, No.359922 dated nil and No.96817 dated 23rd March, 2005 to cover up his prolonged unauthorized absence which certificates were manipulated by him and this amounted to gross misconduct and indiscipline on his part.

5. The petitioner denied the charges made against him. However, the disciplinary authority proposed a departmental enquiry under Rule 36 of CISF Rules, 2001. The petitioner objected to conduct of departmental enquiry by the respondents and relied on Rule 41 of CISF Rules, 2001 and contended that the disciplinary proceedings should have been commenced and concluded by Delhi Police and not by the respondents. Rule 41 of CISF Rules, 2001 is reproduced for the sake of reference which as under:

"Rule 41- Provision regarding enrolled member of the Force, lent to State Government etc. -

(1) Where the services of an enrolled member of the Force and lent to a State Government or other authority herein after in this rules referred to as "borrowing authority", the borrowing authority shall have the powers of the a