Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
RAVI RANJAN, SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, JJ.
Union of India, through Usha Kiran Kandulna, D/o. K.K. Tigga, Deputy Inspector General (ADM) - Appellant
Versus
Aman Tiwary, S/o. Late Ramanuj Tiwary & Ors. - Respondents
L.P.A. No. 197 of 2021
Decided On : 01-11-2022
Constitution of India, 1949 – Article 311 – Central Civil Service (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965 – Section 5 – Rule 5 – Order of Punishment – Liberty – Appeal under Clause 10 of Letters Patent is directed against order/judgment passed by learned Single which appellate order Inspector General OPS Jharkhand Sector – Held, Court considered conclusion as has been arrived learned Single Judge which led learned Single Judge to interfere with impugned order treating appellate order to be stigmatic in nature cannot be considered to be a good ground to interfere with decision taken by respondent-authorities termination of writ petitioner was not on basis of any stigma rather ground of medical unfitness and as such it cannot be treated to be stigmatic in nature reason respondent authorities has terminated writ petitioner from service by resorting – Appeal disposed of.
JUDGMENT :
1. This appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent is directed against the order/judgment dated 29.01.2021 passed by learned Single Judge in W.P.(S) No. 2712 of 2012, by which appellate order dated 30.12.2011 passed by Inspector General, OPS, Jharkhand Sector, CRPF as also order of punishment dated 03.09.2011 and 04.10.2011, issued by the Commandant, 133 Bn, C.R.P.F, Ranchi terminating the services of the petitioner, has been quashed and set aside while allowing the writ petition.
2. The brief facts of the case as per the pleading made in the writ petition required to be enumerated, read as under:
The petitioner applied for selection for the post of Driver in C.R.P.F., Hazaribagh, Jharkhand, 22 Battalion, CRPF Recruitment Centre and accordingly appeared for written test conducted on 06.07.2008, in which, he was declared successful and was informed that offer of appointment shall be sent to his residential address. But for a long period, when no appointment letter was sent to him, the writ petitioner represented before the respondents-authorities several times. The Deputy Inspector General, (Group Centre), CRPF, Sindri, Dhanbad vide letter dated 13.07.2010 informed the petitioner that on verification the driving license of the petitioner, purported to be issued by District Transport Officer, Mon., Nagaland, was found to be false and fabricated.
Aggrieved thereof, the petitioner approached the Patna High Court by filing writ petition being C.W.J.C. No. 2306 of 2011, which was disposed of vide order dated 09.02.2011 in terms of order dated 05.02.2010 passed in CWJC No. 368 of 2010 [Suman Kumar Vs. Union of India & Ors.], whereby the respondent authority was directed to permit the petitioner-Suman Kumar to be appointed on the post of Driver as his Driving Licence was found to be genuine, granting liberty to the respondents-authorities to verify the genuineness of the driving license and correctness of the certificate issued by the D.T.O., Mon, Nagaland.
In terms of the order passed by Patna High Court, the petitioner was directed to report at Group Centre, Ranchi on or before 12.08.2011 along with original documents. Accordingly, the petitioner reported at CRPF Centre, Ranchi and was appointed on the post of Driver and started to discharge his duties.
However, the respondents-authorities before sending the petitioner for basic training subjected him to complete medical examinations on 29.08.2011 and 30.08.2011. After examination, the doctor observed that the candidate (petitioner) has only 10 dental points present out of 22 dental points, therefore, he rendered the petitioner ‘Unfit’ due to carriage teeth.
Considering the fact that the petitioner is medically unfit, the petitioner was served with termination notice under Section 5(1) of the Central Civil Service (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965 vide order dated 03.09.2011 stating that on expiry of one month from the date of receipt of this notice, his services shall stand terminated.
Thereafter, the petitioner was served with letter dated 04.10.2011 whereby it has been intimated that services of the petitioner has been terminated w.e.f. 04.10.2011.
It is the case of the petitioner that no reason has been assigned either in letter dated 03.09.2011 intimating that his services shall be terminated on expiry of one month from the date of receipt of this letter or in letter dated 04.10.2011 whereby services of the petitioner has been terminated. Therefore, the petitioner preferred appeal before the Inspector General of Police, Bihar Sector, CRPF, Patna, which was sent before the Inspector General, OPS, Jharkhand Sector, CRPF, Ranchi. The appe
Point of law: person adversely affected by an order has right of being heard and making representations against order, even though rules do not provide so expressly
The Court affirmed that unconfirmed employees can be terminated based on medical fitness standards, as per the applicable rules.
Conflicting medical fitness opinions from government hospitals entitle merit-selected candidate to fresh independent re-examination, despite initial and review unfitness, without impugning medical bo....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the applicability of the Circular dated 28.05.2013 to the petitioner's recruitment and subsequent termination based on 'Defective Colour Vision'. T....
The main legal point established is the court's discretion to consider leniency in cases of termination on medical grounds and to direct the petitioner to be treated as 'compulsorily retired from ser....
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
