Back
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU
Janak Raj Kotwal, J.
Prithvi Pal Singh -Appellant
Versus
Union Of India & Ors. -Resopndent
SWP No. 1549-2008
Decided On : 13-02-2014
Desertion - Central Reserve Police Force - Central Reserve Police Force Act, 1949, Rule 27 of the Central Reserve Police Force Rules, 1955 - The judgment discusses the charges of desertion against the petitioner under the Central Reserve Police Force Act, 1949 and Rule 27 of the Central Reserve Police Force Rules, 1955. It highlights the legal provisions and interpretations related to desertion, absence without leave, and the authority's power to impose punishment under section 11(1) of the Act.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a member of the Central Reserve Police Force, was charged with desertion and absence without leave. He contested the charges, citing family emergencies as the reason for his absence. The court analyzed the evidence and the legality of the charges, as well as the disciplinary proceedings.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner's absence without leave constituted an offense under section 10(m) of the Act and that he was rightly declared a deserter under section 9(f) of the Act. The court also noted procedural faults in the inquiry process and the disciplinary authority's reliance on insufficient evidence.
Issues: The issues included the legality of the charges, the petitioner's defense of family emergencies, and the procedural errors in the disciplinary proceedings.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the charges of desertion and absence without leave were valid under the Act and Rules. It also emphasized the importance of following proper procedures in disciplinary inquiries and the need for sufficient evidence to support disciplinary actions.
Final Decision: The court quashed the order of compulsory retirement imposed on the petitioner, citing procedural faults and insufficient evidence. The disciplinary authority was directed to provide the petitioner with a fair opportunity to present evidence and to pass a fresh order based on the evidence presented.
2. This writ petition by the petitioner is directed against order No. P-VIII-2/2005-EC-II dated 08.09.2005 issued by the commandant, 158 BN. (respondent No. 3) whereby, pursuant to departmental inquiry and Inquiry Officer's report dated 08.04.2005, punishment of `Compulsory Retirement' from service in terms of section 11(1) of the Central Reserve Police Force Act, 1949 (for short the Act) read with Rule 27 of the Central Reserve Police Force Rules, 1955 (for short the Rules) has been imposed upon the petitioner. Besides, petitioner has also assailed order dated 18.08.2006 passed in appeal by Additional Director General of the Force, order dated 17.05.2007 passed by respondent No.2 in the second appeal and order dated 29.11.2007 passed by respondent No.1 in a representation submitted by the petitioner. Petitioner, thus, seeks writ of certiorari setting aside and quashing of order dated 08.09.2005, order-dated 18.06.2006 and the order passed in the application seeking revision of the said orders. Further, he has sought direction commanding the respondents to reinstate the petitioner in service of the Force with effect from 08.09.2005, with all consequential reliefs.
3. Respondents have opposed the writ petition by filing objections supported by an affidavit sworn in by one S. R. Panthi, DIGP, Group Centre CRPF, Bantalab, Jammu.
4. Heard. I have perused the record.
5. Facts relevant for disposal of this writ petition may be stated, briefly:
6. Petitioner on his transfer from 121 Bn. was posted as Head Constable in B. Coy. of 158 Bn. of the Force at Kadarpur, Haryana. He left his place of duty without leave and permission on 30.07.2004 at 8.30 in the morning and remained absent without leave up to 25.12.2004. He did not join during this period despite communications having been issued from the Battalion at his available address. He reported for duty on 25. 12. 2004. After his joining he was served with a `MEMORANDUM' and `Articles of charges' by the Commandant of the Battalion for holding a departmental inquiry against him. Articles of charge served upon him were as follows :
"Article-I: That the Said No.830764613 HC/GD P.P. Singh of B/158 Bn CRPF Kadarpur while functioning as a Head Constable at B/158 BN CRPF-Kadarpur has conducted misconduct in his capacity as a member of the Force U/S 11(1) of CRPF Act-1949 in that he deserted from line on 30/7/04 at about 08:30 hours which is prejudicial to the good order and discipline of the force he serve and punishable under Rule 27 of CRPF Rule 1955.
Article-II: That the said No. 830764613 HC/GD P.P. Singh of B/158 Bn CRPF Kadarpur while functioning as HC/GD at B/158 BN CRPF Kadarpur has conducted grave misconduct in his capacity as a member of the Force U/S 11(1) of CRPF Act 1949 in that after deserting from Camp/duty, he remained absent from 30/7/04 to 25/12/04 without any prior approval from competent authority, which is prejudicial to the good order and discipline of the force they serve and punishable under Rule 27 of CRPF Rule 1955.
Article-III: That the said No.830764613 HC/GD P.P. Singh of B/158 Bn CRPF Kadarpur while functioning as HC/GD at B/158 BN CRPF Kadarpur has conducted grave misconduct in his capacity as a member of the Force U/S 11(1) of CRPF Act 1949 in that after deserting from Camp/duty, he remained absent from 30/7/04 to 25/12.04 without any prior approval from competent authority, in that he failed to obey the law full orders issued to him vide letter No.D.II-I/04-B/158 dated 2/8/04 and 20/8/04 and letter No.P.VIII-I/04-EC-II-158 dated 7/12.04 in which he was ordered to report back in this unit which is prejudicial to the good order and discipline of the force and punishable under rule 27 of CRPF Rule 1955
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
