Back
2015 Supreme(J&K) 383
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT SRINAGAR
Hasnain Massodi, J.
Tajdar Khan – Appellant
Vs.
Union of India and Ors. – Respondent
SWP No. 1490/2007 and CMP No. 2646/2007
Decided On : 01-06-2015
For the Appellant :H. Furrahi, Advocate
For the Respondents: S.A. Makroo, ASGI
Violation of Rule 15 of the CRPF Rules, 1955, constitutes misconduct, and the punishment of compulsory retirement can be imposed for such violation.
Headnote:
Second Marriage - Compulsory Retirement - CRPF Rules, 1955, Section 11(1) - Rule 15, Rule 27 - The court discussed the violation of Rule 15 of the CRPF Rules, 1955, which prohibits a member of the Force from contracting a second marriage without permission from the Government. The court also considered the power of the Commandant of Battalion to award punishment of compulsory retirement to a Non-Gazetted Officer under Rule 27. The judgment highlighted the interpretation of the rules and their application in the case, leading to the decision of compulsory retirement for the petitioner.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a Constable in the Force, was compulsorily retired for contracting a second marriage during the subsistence of his first marriage without permission. The petitioner challenged the order on various grounds including violation of rules and disproportionate punishment.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner violated Rule 15 of the CRPF Rules, 1955, and that the departmental enquiry was conducted in accordance with the rules. The court also concluded that the punishment of compulsory retirement was not disproportionate considering the misconduct committed by the petitioner.
Issues: Violation of CRPF Rules, fairness of departmental enquiry, and proportionality of the punishment.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the petitioner's violation of Rule 15 constituted misconduct and that the departmental enquiry was conducted fairly. The court also determined that the punishment of compulsory retirement was not disproportionate to the misconduct.
Final Decision: The petition was dismissed, and the order of compulsory retirement was upheld.
Hasnain Massodi, J.
1. Petitioner is aggrieved with order of Commandant 152 Battalion CRPF respondent No. 5 herein, bearing No. P.VIII-3/2007/CE-III dated 28th September 2007, whereby he has been compulsorily retired from services. He on strength of averments made in petition on hand seeks following relief:
"(a) Writ of Certiorari, quashing impugned order bearing No. P. VIII-3/2007/CE-II dated 28th September 2007, passed by respondent No. 5;
(b) Writ of Mandamus, commanding respondents to take petitioner back in service w.e.f. 28th September 2007 by revoking/recalling impugned order dated 28th September 2007;
(c) Writ of Mandamus, commanding respondents not to fill up the post till the matter is finally disposed of by this Hon'ble Court as if he was in regular service in respondent department;
(d) Writ of Mandamus, commanding respondents not to act upon over impugned order dated 28th September 2007, by releasing all monetary benefits in favour of petitioner to which he is entitled including sustenance allowance which are due to him under rules."
Petitioner was enrolled as Constable in the Force in 1996. His wife Ms Naseema Begum, sometime in 2006, addressed a representation to respondent No. 5, stating therein that she was married to petitioner in December 1992 and three children are born out of wedlock; that their marital life ran smoothly till 20th May 2006, when petitioner married one Ms Razia and brought her as his second wife to his home. Mst Naseema Begum, further represented that petitioner, after contracting marriage with Ms Razia, was threatening her to leave his house along with children and that she is being forced to be burden on her old aged parents. Copy of representation was forwarded to superior officers of the Force.
2. Receipt of representation prompted respondent No. 5 to seek report from Senior Superintendent of Police, Kupwara, touching grievance, set out in representation. Senior Superintendent of Police, Kupwara, in turn entrusted matter to Deputy Superintendent of Police, Headquarters. The Officer conducted a brief enquiry into the matter, recorded statement of representational list and submitted his report to Senior Superintendent of Police, Kupwara, who in turn vide his letter No. CRB-26/06-1452 dated 7th February 2007, while confirming that Ms Naseema Begum was first wife of petitioner, reported that parties have amicably settled matter and Ms Naseema Begum is not more keen to pursue complaint.
3. Respondent No. 5, notwithstanding report received from Senior Superintendent of Police, Kupwara, decided to proceed against petitioner and accordingly issued show cause notice dated 12th February 2007 to petitioner, reminding him that he in violation of Central Reserve Police Force Rules, 1955, had contracted second marriage with Ms Razia, during subsistence of first marriage with Ms Naseema Begum, asked him to submit his explanation and show cause as to why disciplinary action in terms of Section 11 (1), CRPF Act read with Rule 15, CRPF Rules, 1955, should not be taken against him.
4. Petitioner submitted his explanation to the show cause notice. The stand taken was that second marriage was necessitated by continued ill health of Ms Naseema Begum and to ensure that because of her ill health, three children born out of wedlock were not exposed to any inconvenience. Petitioner maintained that once Ms Naseema Begum, realized that whatever was done by petitioner, was in her interest and in the interest of children, she decided not to pursue matter and made a statement before Senior Superintendent of Police, Kupwara, and Deputy Superintendent of Police, Headquarters, Kupwara. It was further stated that petitioner, after realizing that though it was permissible under Personal Law for him to contract second marriage, yet CRPF Rules required prior permission of competent authority to contract second marriage, divorced Ms Razia as was evident from affidavit sworn by her. Petitioner further stated that he had love
