The main legal point established in the judgment is that disciplinary proceedings must be based on cogent evidence, and findings cannot be considered valid if they are based on speculation or lack evidentiary support.

JUDGMENT :

The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order as contained in memo no. 6976 dated 24.09.2016 (Annexure-7 to the writ petition) passed by the Disciplinary Authority i.e., the respondent no. 5 – the Superintendent of Police (Administration), Jharkhand Jaguar (STF), Ranchi, whereby a punishment of “one black mark” has been imposed against the petitioner. Further prayer has been made for quashing the order as contained in memo no. 5012 dated 08.08.2018 (Annexure-9 to the writ petition) passed by the Appellate Authority i.e., the respondent no. 4 – the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Jharkhand Jaguar (STF), Ranchi, whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner has been rejected. The petitioner has also prayed for quashing the letter no. 333 dated 12.12.2018 (Annexure-11 to the writ petition) issued by the respondent no. 3 – the Inspector General of Police (Training), Jharkhand, Ranchi to the respondent no. 5, whereby it has been intimated that the revision application preferred by the petitioner cannot be entertained and the information regarding the same should be made available to him.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a Sub-Inspector in Jharkhand Police and was posted as Officer-in- Charge, Kuru Police Station, District-Lohardaga during filing of the present writ petition. On 17.06.2016, an order was issued by the respondent no. 3 to the respondent no. 5 for sending the police personnel of Jharkhand Jaguars (STF) to NSG Training Centre, Manesar, Gurgaon, Haryana to get training of police commando instructor. As per the said order, two officers from the rank of Police Inspector to Assistant Sub-Inspector were to be sent for said training from Jhakhand Jaguar (STF), Ranchi. Thereafter, the respondent no. 5 requested the Civil Surgeon, Sadar Hospital, Ranchi on 21.06.2016 for constituting a Medical Board to conduct physical fitness test of the selected police personnel of Jharkhand including the petitioner. However, no medical board was constituted. Moreover, prior to issuance of letter dated 21.06.2016, the Physical Fitness Test of the petitioner along with other police personnel was done by a doctor at the JAP-1 Hospital, Ranchi on 20.06.2016 in which the petitioner was not found fit by the doctor. On 01.07.2016, initiation of departmental proceeding against the petitioner was intimated by serving memo of charge alleging gross indiscipline, dereliction of duty, lack of interest in work and arbitrariness against him.

3. It is further submitted that the only allegation against the petitioner was that he with an intention to avoid the said training, produced a certificate of “medically unfit”. In reply to the said allegation, the petitioner submitted his explanation on 03.09.2016 before the conducting officer stating that the concerned doctor of JAP-1 Hospital, Ranchi had given an independent finding which was not influenced by him. Thereafter, a departmental proceeding no. 28/16 was conducted against the petitioner by the enquiry officer on 09.09.2016, wherein the statements of departmental witnesses as well as of the petitioner in defence were recorded. It would inspire from the said proceeding that there was no evidence against the petitioner to prove the charge levelled against him. However, the enquiry officer finally observed that the charge levelled against the petitioner was proved. The Disciplinary Authority i.e., the respondent no. 5 found the petitioner guilty of the charge and imposed a punishment of “one black mark” in service book vide memo no. 6976 dated 24.09.2016, which is a major punishment as per Rule 824 of the Jharkhand Police Manual.

4. Aggrieved with the said order of the disciplinary authority, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Appellate Authority i.e., the respondent no. 4 on 06.07.2018 stating that the medical certificate was never produced by him personally before the concerned authority, rather the same was produced by the office