Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
MANMOHAN, NAVIN CHAWLA
Arup Das Mohanta (EX Const. GD) – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenging convening and sentencing orders (Para 1) |
| 2. petitioner's right to statutory appeal (Para 2) |
| 3. court's directive for timely resolution (Para 3) |
JUDGMENT
Manmohan, J. (Oral)
C.M.No.43886/2021
Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
Accordingly, the application stands disposed of.
W.P.(C) No.13905/2021
1. Present writ petition has been filed challenging the convening order and charge-sheet dated 11th March 2021 and the sentencing order dated 20th March 2021 issued by Respondent No. 3. Petitioner also seeks directions to the Respondents to reinstate the Petitioner in service w.e.f. 20th March 2021 and release his arrears of pay and allowances till date.
2. Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that subsequent to the order dated 17th March, 2021 passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.3507/2021, whereby this Court granted liberty to the Petitioner to withdraw the petition and raise all issues before the SSFC, the Petitioner had preferred a statutory petition challenging the sentence dated 20th March, 2021 under Section 117 of the BSF Act read with Rule 167 (2) of the BSF Rules, but the same has not been disposed of till date.
3. Keeping in vi
Timely adjudication of statutory petitions under the BSF Act is essential for ensuring due process and protecting the rights of personnel.
Court directed the Director General of BSF to expeditiously decide the petitioner's application for suspension of sentence within four weeks, without commenting on the merits of the case.
A petitioner is entitled to access documents of disciplinary proceedings to ensure fairness in adjudication under the BSF Act.
Entitlement to documents and expeditious adjudication under the BSF Act.
A writ petition is premature if the petitioner has not exhausted available statutory remedies as outlined in the governing Act.
The validity of a charge sheet under the BSF Act is not affected by unrelated pending matters or unsubstantiated allegations of bias.
Summary Security Force Court proceedings must be conducted with due process, but admissions of guilt by the petitioners validated their dismissals despite procedural irregularities.
The court directed timely adjudication of a statutory petition under the Border Security Force Act, ensuring procedural compliance without addressing the merits.
The court upheld the dismissal of the petitioner from service, finding the punishment proportionate to the gravity of his repeated misconduct and not warranting judicial intervention.
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
