Discharge of Home Guards volunteer based solely on FIR registrations without notice, hearing or conviction violates natural justice and statute; post-acquittal reinstatement not automatic, competent authority to assess suitability and benefits.

JUDGMENT :
Ranjan Sharma, Judge

Petitioner, Pyare Lal, being a Home Guards volunteer, having been discharged, leading to dismissal from service of the Home Guards Organization, had filed an Original Application No 3592 of 2018, before Learned Himachal Pradesh State Administrative Tribunal and upon abolition of Tribunal, the same was transferred to this Court as CWPOA No. 4662 of 2020, seeking the following relief(s):

“(a) Quash the impugned order dated 27.9.2017 (Annexure A-1) being arbitrary, malafide and illegal;

(b). Direct the respondents to reinstate the applicant from the date of above illegal order along with arrears of salary with interest thereon @ 18% pa.”

FACTUAL MATRIX:

2. Case as set up by Learned Counsel is that the petitioner was enrolled as Volunteer in Home Guards on 15.12.1991 [Annexure A-2] but on 27.09.2017 [Annexure A-1], Respondents discharged the petitioner from service, resulting in his dismissal due to involvement in criminal cases, originating from FIR No 162 of 2015 and FIR No 186 of 2017 under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (referred to as NDPS Act herein), in an unfair, unjust and illegal manner, with the prayer to quash the dismissal orders and to direct reinstatement of the petitioner in service with all consequential benefits.

STAND OF THE STATE AUTHORITIES:

3. Pursuant to the issuance of notice, the State Authorities have filed the Reply-Affidavit dated 09.08.2018.

3(i). Stand of the State Authorities in the Reply-Affidavit is that while the petitioner was serving as Home Guards Volunteer, petitioner had indulged in a serious offence and such a conduct was unbecoming of a member of a disciplinary force. Reply-Affidavit indicates that pursuant to registration of 162 of 2015, dated 19.07.2015 and FIR No 186 of 2017, dated 25.09.2017, the petitioner had remained in custody for a long period. It is averred that the Impugned order of discharge, resulting in dismissal of the petitioner from service has been opposed by State Authorities by invoking Section 6 of the Home Guards Act. It is in this backdrop, a prayer is made for dismissing the writ petition.

REBUTTAL BY PETITIONER:

4. Petitioner has filed a rejoinder placing on record the judgment passed by the Learned Special Judge, Ghumarwin, District Bilaspur, in Case Number [CIS Registration Number, 19 of 2017, originating from FIR No 186 of 2017] to assert that the petitioner stands acquitted on 20.12.2023 [Annexure P-1] and likewise, in Case Number [CIS Registration Number 56 of 2017, relating to FIR No 162 of 2015, petitioner stands acquitted in criminal case on 27.07.2023 also.

5. Heard, Ms. Shalini Thakur, Learned Counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Seema Sharma Learned Deputy Advocate General for the Respondents-State and perused the material available on record.

STATUTORY PROVISIONS:

6. Before proceeding to analyze the claim and rival contentions, it is necessary to have a recap of the Himachal Pradesh Home Guards Act and the relevant provisions of Section 6 , 12(i) and 12(2) of the Home Guards Act, 1968, reads as under:-

“6. Power to discharge a volunteer of Home Guards-

Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (4) of section 5, the Commandant General or the Commandant shall have the authority to discharge any volunteer of the Home Guards at any time subject to such conditions as may be prescribed, if, in his opinion, the services of such volunteer are no longer required.

12. Punishment of volunteers for neglect of duty etc..-

(1) The Commandant General or the Commandant shall have the authority to suspend, reduce in rank, or dismiss or fine to an amount not exceed