JUDGMENT :

Heard learned counsel for the parties through V.C.

2. The instant application has been preferred by the petitioner for following reliefs:-

(i) For quashing the order as contained in Memo No.V-15014/CCL(K)/CISF/MAJ-16/DISC/2002-14/2304 dated 31.03.2014, issued by Commandant, CISF Unit CCL Kargali (Annexure-7), whereby major punishment from removal of service has only been modified by imposing another and more harsh punishment which has far reaching consequences to the petitioner’s pension for rest of his life. It has also been mentioned that since the petitioner has already attained the age of superannuation retirement w.e.f 30.11.12 (A/N) as such he is struck off from the strength of this unit as well as from CISF w.e.f 01.12.2012(F/N).

(ii) For quashing the show-cause notice issued to the petitioner vide Memo No.V-15014/CCL(K)/CISF/MAJ-16/DISC/2002-14/2643 dated 11.04.2014 issued by Commandant, CISF Unit CCL Kargali, (Annexure-8) by which the respondent has proposed to treat the intervening period from the date of award of above punishment i.e. 31.05.2003 to the date of superannuation retirement i.e. 30.11.2012, to be regularized as Dies-Non.

(iii) For commanding upon the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioner from 31.05.2003 to 30.11.2012 (the period for which the petitioner has now been treated to be under suspension).

(iv) For commanding upon the respondents to pay all the post retiral dues including full salary for the period of his suspension as he had only been paid subsistence allowance, whereas the respondents have decided that the petitioner shall not be paid anything more than what he had already been paid i.e. subsistence allowance.

Thereafter, during pendency of the writ petition an amendment application being I.A. No.3633 of 2019 has been preferred for quashing the Dies-non order as contained in Memo No. V-15014/CCL(K)/CISF/MAJ-16/DISC/2002-14/4934, dated 22.07.2014 (Annexure-A to the supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the Union of India) whereby, the intervening period has been treated as Dies-non, which was allowed vide order dated 08.05.2019 and thereafter amended writ petition has been filed.

3. This is second round of litigation. The petitioner had earlier moved before this Court by filing a writ application being W.P.(S) No.4662 of 2004, which was disposed of by this Court vide its order dated 12.12.2013, whereby impugned order of punishment, the petitioner was removed from service, was quashed along with the subsequent appellate and revisional orders and the matter was remitted back to the disciplinary authority for taking a decision in so far as quantum of punishment is concerned.

4. The brief facts as it appears from the writ application are that the petitioner was appointed on 27.12.1973 in Indian Army and after his superannuation from service in the Indian Army; he joined the Central Industrial Security Force as a constable on 04.03.1994. A charge Memo dated 30.12.2002 was served upon the petitioner on the allegation that he demanded and accepted illegal gratification of Rs.10/-from one Jogeshwar Singh, who was a truck driver and also for violation of the company rules as he has kept with himself more than Rs.15/-while on duty. By order dated 24.12.2002, the petitioner was put under suspension and a preliminary enquiry was conducted into the matter and after considering the reply of the petitioner a regular departmental proceeding was initiated against him. The enquiry report dated 11.04.2003 was submitted and the petitioner was issued a second show-cause notice on 03.05.2003. The petitioner submitted his representation on 15.05.2003 and the penalty order, removing the petitioner from service was passed on 31.05.2003.

5. On the question of charge no.1 with respect to demanding and accepting of illegal gratification of Rs.10 from the truck driver namely, Jogeshwar Singh, this Court held that this charge leveled against the petitioner that he demanded and accepted Rs.10 from t