Disciplinary proceedings must prioritize conduct and efficiency; failure to engage in due process can lead to disciplinary action despite claims of injustice.

JUDGMENT

Manmohan, J. (Oral)--The hearing has been done by way of video conferencing.

2. Present writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 05th July, 2018 passed by Respondent No. 4, DIG, CISF, South Zone, Chennai, whereby the Petitioner was removed from service. Petitioner also challenges the orders dated 18th January, 2019 and 14th May, 2020 whereby his appeal and revision petition were dismissed respectively. Petitioner also challenges the minor penalties awarded to him vide orders dated 03rd October, 2016, 12th December, 2016, 20th February, 2017, 05th May, 2017 and 24th May, 2018. Petitioner seeks direction to the respondent to reinstate the Petitioner into service since 05th July, 2018 with all consequential benefits.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the impugned orders have been passed in violation of the principles of natural justice as the petitioner had not been given an opportunity of a proper hearing and was not allowed to submit a reply or written submission. He states that the penalties imposed on the Petitioner are grossly disproportionate and have been imposed on him due to bias, malice and personal vendetta towards the Petitioner. He further states that during his tenure the petitioner had found serious irregularities in the dog diet, which he reported to the senior authorities. He states that after this he was maliciously prosecuted.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the impugned order has been passed in violation of Rule 36 of the CISF Rules as the Enquiry Officer was appointed by the Deputy Inspector Commandant even though he was not the Disciplinary authority.

5. A perusal of the paper book reveals that the petitioner is an habitual offender. He has been awarded as many as six punishments during the period 2011 to 2017. In fact the petitioner had been meted out punishments even prior to the alleged complaint by him with regard to dog diet. The relevant portion of the order dated 05th July, 2018 is reproduced hereinbelow:-

"As far as the Article of Charge-III, it has been well substantiated during the course of enquiry from the statement and exhibits produced by HC/CLK Hariom Meena of CISF Unit CPT Cochin (PW-09) In-charge of document section and holding the responsibility of maintaining of service record of the unit personnel including Charged Official that the Charge Official has not improved himself despite having been awarded penalties on 06 occasions in his past for improving his conduct as mentioned below:-

A. Awarded the penalty of "Censure" for 09 days AWL w.e.f. 18.01.2011 (AN) to 26.01.2011 from NISA Campus during Basic Training vid AC/Trg. CISF NISA Hyderbad Final Order No. (549) dated 19.03.2011 (PW-IX/Exhibit-01).

B. Awarded the penalty of "Withholding of one increment for one year without cumulative effect" for found sleeping during night shift duty on 02/03.07.2014 vide DIG, IGI Airport review order No. (14183) dated 28.07.2015 (PWIX/Exhibit-02).

C. Awarded the penalty of "Fine equivalent to three days pay" for failure to detect live ammunition from the hand of passenger during screening while on screening duty on 01.07.2016 at XBis-1 of CISF ASG Imphal vide AC,CISF Unit ASG Imphal Final Order No. (3190) dated 03.10.2016 (PW-IX/Exhibit-03).

D. Awarded the penalty of "Fine equivalent to five days pay" for disobeying orders in the Official Order No. (3430) dated 02.11.2016 regarding handing/taking over of charge of Dog Squad and Training In-charge vide AC, CISF ASG Imphal Final Order No. (3860) dated 12.12.206 (PW-IX/Exhibit-04).

E. Awarded the penalty of "One day pay fine" for absence from duty on 08.01.2017 vide AC, CISF ASG Imphal Final Order No. (446) dated 20.02.2017 (PW-IX/Exhibit-05).

F