Back
2011 Supreme(J&K) 143
JAMMU & KASHMIR HIGH COURT
F.M.Ibrahim Kalifulla, Mohd.Yaqoob Mir, JJ.
Union of India & Ors. -Appellant
Versus
Jeet Singh -Resopndent
LPA(SW) No. 442/2002
Decided On : 29-03-2011
Mr.Ajay Sharma, CGSC for the Appellants., Mrs.Surinder Kour, Advocate for the Respondent.
The main legal point established is that the prescribed authority followed the procedure as required by Rule 22 of the BSF Rules and Section 11(2) of the BSF Act, and there was no violation of natural justice principles.
Headnote:
Dismissal - Border Security Force - Rule 22 of the BSF Rules - Section 11(2) of the BSF Act - Rule 177 of the BSF Rules
Fact of the Case:
The writ petitioner, a Driver Constable in Border Security Force, overstayed leave without permission and was dismissed from service. The court analyzed the application of BSF Rules and Act in the dismissal process.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the dismissal order was in accordance with Rule 22 of the BSF Rules and Section 11(2) of the BSF Act, and there was no violation of principles of natural justice.
Issues: Application of BSF Rules and Act in the dismissal process, compliance with natural justice principles.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the prescribed authority followed the procedure as required by Rule 22 of the BSF Rules and Section 11(2) of the BSF Act, and there was no violation of natural justice principles.
Final Decision: The judgment of the writ court was set aside, and the writ petition filed by the respondent was dismissed.
1. Instant Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the judgment dated 26.4.2002 passed by learned Writ Court in SWP No.409/2000 captioned Jeet Singh v. Union of India & ors, where-under order of dismissal has been quashed and the respondent Jeet Singh (writ petitioner) has been directed to be reinstated in service and has also been held entitled to all consequential benefits including monetary benefits. The appellants have been left free to hold enquiry against the respondent (writ petitioner) in accordance with the procedure provided under B.S.F Act and the rules.
2. The respondent (writ petitioner) was working as Driver Constable in Border Security Force, he had proceeded on leave but overstayed with effect from 26.5.1994 without any permission so was informed vide communication dated 29th of June, 1994 to report back for duty immediately failing which disciplinary action will be initiated. The writ petitioner did not report back as a result thereof vide communication dated 8th of August, 1994 show cause notice has been served upon the respondent (writ petitioner), same is reproduced here-under: -
"No. Estt/AWL/COI/77/94/8702 77 Battalion BSF C/O56APO
To, Dated, the 8 Aug' 94
No.90004901 Const Jeet Singh
Vill: Kangwala camp,
Post: Bhangdhour
Distt:Samba Tehsil (Jammu - Distt) Jammu & Kashmir.
Sub : SHOW CAUSE NOTICE
You have been absent without leave from 26-05-94. After considering the reports relating to your absence, I am satisfied that your trial by a Security Force Court is impracticable but am of the opinion that your further retention in service is undesirable. I, therefore, tentatively propose to dismiss you from the service. If you have anything to urge in your defence against the imposition of the proposed penalty, you may do so within 30 days of the issue of this letter. In case no reply is received within the stipulated period, it would be presumed that you have no defence to put forward and ex-parte decision will be taken into the matter.
(Y. Banerjie) Commandant 77 BN BSF".
3. In response thereto, writ petitioner moved an application on 22.8.1994. On considering the same application, petitioner vide communication dated 26th of August, 1994 has been directed to report for duty within 15 days on receipt of the letter, same is reproduced here-under:
To, 26 Aug' 94
No.90004901 CT Jeet Singh
Vill: Kangwala camp,
Post: Bhangdhour Samba Tehsil, Jammu District.
Sub : QVERSTAYAL OF LEAVE Ref: Your application dated 22.8.94.
You are directed to report Bn. HQ for duty within 15 days on receipt of this letter, failing which you will be dismissed from service.
CY. Banerjie) Commandant 77 BN BSF".
4. Writ petitioner seems to have failed to report back to the duty, resultantly he has been dismissed from service with effect from 19.9.1994 vide order dated 29th of September, 1994 which is reproduced herein-below:-
"No. Estt/AWL/COI/77/94/9996-10025 77 Battalion BSF C/0 56 APO Dated, the 29 Sept, 94 To,
No.90004901 Const
Jeet Singh
Vill: Kangwala camp PO Bhangdhour
Tehsil Samba District Jammu.
Sub : Dismissal from service.
Whereas, I have gone through the case of absence without leave against you. You were given an opportunity to show cause vide this office letter No. Estt/AWL/77/94/8702 dated 8.8.1994 and letter No. Estt/AWL/COI/77/94/9308 dated 26.8.1994, which you have not availed of. I am satisfied that you are absent without leave without any reasonable cause and that your further retention in the service is undesirable. I, therefore, dismiss you from service with effect from 19 Sept. 94(A).
2. Your absence period from 26.5.94 to 19.9.94 will be treated as 'dies non'.
3. You have been struck of from the strength of this unit w.e.f. 19.9.94.
Sd/-
(Y. Bannerjie)
Commandant
77 BN BSF"
5. It is the said order which has been impugned in the writ petition. Learned writ court has opined that procedure envisaged under Rules 20 and 21 of the BSF Rules was required to be followed but same has not been done, therefore, order impugned could not
