Back
SANJAY DHAR
Madan Gopal Singh, S/o. Sh. Jaswant Singh – Appellant
Versus
Union of India, through Home Secretary, Ministry of Home, Govt. of India, New Delhi – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. The petitioner has challenged order No. III/Adm/15/Vol-II/2000-15032 dated 27.07.2002 issued by respondent No. 3, whereby a direction has been issued for conducting fresh enquiry and at the same time, enhanced penalty of dismissal from service against the petitioner has also been proposed. Challange has also been thrown to the order No. Estt/9460409/GCJ/02(E)/10951 dated 09.08.2002 issued by respondent No. 6, whereby fresh charges have been framed against the petitioner.
2. It appears that the petitioner was appointed as constable in Sashastra Seema Bal(SSB) on 16.09.1994. While serving at Group Centre Gangyal, Jammu, he was allowed to handle the Pay Disbursement Register and Acquaintance Roll pertaining to payments of company personnel. It was alleged that he managed to misappropriate Rs. 77,284/- by making overwriting and cutting in the Acquaintance Roll and Pay Disbursement Register which resulted in less payment of claims of 70 company personnel on 210 occasions. Thus charges of negligence, remissness and misconduct under section 11(1) of the CRPF Act, which was applicable to the SSB at the relevant time, were framed. Court of enquiry was conducted from 28.01.2001
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the subject matter of the earlier departmental enquiry must be different from the subject matter of the fresh enquiry, and the authority of th....
The impugned action of the Force in issuing the orders of preparation and issuance of a fresh charge-sheet and a full-fledged departmental enquiry could not be sustained under Rule 219.4 (b).
As per Rule 27(a) of Rules of 1949, punishment of dismissal or removal from service including that of reduction to a lower stage in time scale of pay for a specific period can be imposed by Commandan....
The Disciplinary Authority can order further enquiry only if serious defects exist in the initial enquiry; it cannot do so after a finding of exoneration.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the respondents followed the provisions of the CRPF Act and Rules in conducting the inquiry and imposing the punishment on the petitioner.
The revisional authority has the power to enhance punishment suo moto under CRPF Rules, and procedural fairness was upheld in the inquiry process.
The disciplinary authority cannot order a fresh enquiry without identifying material irregularities in the previous proceedings, emphasizing adherence to the procedural rules and safeguarding the rig....
The court emphasized the importance of following the prescribed disciplinary procedures and upheld the principle of proportionality in imposing penalties for misconduct.
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
