Discharges based on multiple red ink entries are valid under Assam Rifles Records Office Instructions, provided due process is followed, including issuance of a show-cause notice.

JUDGMENT :

(SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI, J.)

The instant writ petition has been filed challenging an order dated 09.04.2020 by which the petitioner was discharged from his service in the Assam Rifles on the ground that he had earned four red ink entries. The petitioner contends that the red ink entries were awarded to him without adhering to the due process of law. It is further alleged that the impugned order was passed without any inquiry, thereby resulting into gross violation of the principles of natural justice.

2. As per the facts projected, the petitioner was appointed as a Rifleman in the Assam Rifles in 1993. In the year 1998 he had successfully completed the commando course and thereafter had completed the physical training course. It is the case of the petitioner, that in 2002, while he was on leave, his grandfather fell seriously ill and subsequently passed away, due to which he had to seek an extension of his leave. The petitioner has pleaded that he had made a telephonic request for the extension which was, however, refused. As a result, there was a delay of ten days in rejoining his duties. The aforesaid delay culminated in a court martial proceedings pursuant to which, the petitioner was sentenced to 28 days of rigorous imprisonment. The said sentencing and imprisonment led to the first red ink entry in his service record.

3. It has been pleaded that in January 2012, while the petitioner was detailed for a physical efficiency test and firing practice, he was hospitalised and advised two weeks of rest. However, the said period was treated as unauthorized absence and another court martial was conducted, which again resulted into a similar penalty of 28 days of rigorous imprisonment, thereby leading to a second red ink entry.

4. The petitioner also submits that in 2015, while the he was in transit, he lost his Identity Card and train ticket due to theft. He claims that he had lodged an FIR in this regard. However, the matter was taken in an incorrect perspective and another court martial proceeding was initiated against him, leading to a third red ink entry.

5. Thereafter, in the year 2019, while the petitioner was detailed for Road Opening Patrol (ROP) duty, he was confronted by senior officers, sent to medical examination, and was allegedly found to be intoxicated. The petitioner submits that these allegations are wholly concocted and incorrect and that he was unnecessarily dragged to another court martial proceeding, leading to the fourth red ink entry. Consequently, in September 2019, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner as to why he should not be discharged from service. The said show cause notice was replied to by the petitioner followed by the impugned order dated 09.04.2020 by which the petitioner was discharged from his duties. It is the aforesaid order of discharge that forms the subject matter of challenge in this present writ petition.

6. I have heard Ms. S. Bora, learned counsel for the petitioner, and also Sh. K. Gogoi, learned Central Government Counsel (CGC).

7. Ms. Bora, the learned counsel for the petitioner, has submitted that the red ink entries were recorded without any reasonable ground or proper basis. She contends that on each occasion, there were proper grounds cited by the petitioner which were not duly considered by the authorities. With regard to the first incident in February 2002, she submitted that the petitioner had applied for leave due to the serious illness of his grandfather. While he was