Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Manmohan, Asha Menon, JJ.
Bajrang Lal - Appellant
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
W.P.(C) 4163 of 2021
Decided On : 05-04-2021
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to removal from service based on caste certificate. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. legal representation and contesting claims. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. court's directive on petition treatment. (Para 7 , 8) |
JUDGMENT
Manmohan, J. (Oral)--Present writ petition has been filed challenging the order of removal from service dated 29th December, 2019 and order dated 04th June, 2020. Petitioner also seeks directions to the Respondents to re-instate the petitioner in service with all consequential benefits accruing therefrom.
2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner states that the Petitioner, a Constable/GD with the CISF, was removed from service vide order dated 29th December, 2019 on the charge of producing a "false and fabricated" OBC certificate.
3. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner was recruited on the basis of caste certificate dated 30th March 2017 and not on the basis of certificate dated 18th May, 2016. He, however, states that the inquiry officer without considering this and without verifying the correctness of the OBC certificate dated 30th March, 2017 submitted his report to prove the alleged charge against the petitioner.
4. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner also states that the Petitioner has filed a statutory petition dated 14th September, 2020 to the Director General, CISF, New Delhi, which has not been decided till date.
5. Issue notice.
6. Mr. Jagjit Singh, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of the Respondents. He vehemently disputes the contentions advanced by the learned counsel for the Petitioner. He further states that the statutory petition filed by the Petitioner is not maintainable as a revision petition alone is maintainable.
7. Since it is settled law that nomenclature of a petition is not relevant, this Court disposes of the present writ petition and pending applications with a direction to the Respondent No.2 to treat the petitioner's statutory petition dated 14th September 2020 as a revision petition and to decide the same by way of a reasoned order in accordance with law within six weeks.
8. This Court clarifies that it has not expressed any opinion on the merit of the controversy. All the rights and contentions of the parties are left open.
A statutory petition's nomenclature does not restrict its maintainability, and it must be adjudicated based on its merits.
The enforcement of service rights requires adherence to due process and fair inquiry, particularly in disciplinary actions against employees.
The verification of the OBC certificate and the entitlement of the petitioner to the benefit of his caste were central to the court's decision to set aside the removal orders and direct reinstatement....
The dismissal of a government employee for non-compliance with transfer orders is justified when the employee fails to report for duty, despite health conditions.
Disciplinary proceedings must prioritize conduct and efficiency; failure to engage in due process can lead to disciplinary action despite claims of injustice.
The court emphasizes that significant delays in pursuing remedies may result in dismissal of claims based on laches and waiver of rights, particularly in employment disputes.
In the absence of confirmation of service and pendency of departmental process to verify caste certificate, protection against ouster as per Kavita Solunke and Shalini judgments is not applicable.
Disciplinary authorities can impose removal from service for proven serious misconduct; past penalties may be considered, but each case must adhere to procedural standards without arbitrary penalties....
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
