Judicial review in departmental proceedings is limited, and unless the punishment is shocking or impermissible, courts should not interfere with disciplinary authority decisions.

ORDER :

ANANDA SEN, J.

In this writ petition, petitioner has challenged the order passed by the revisional authority as contained in letter No.11015/East/LC/Rev-01/ 2022- 546, dated 31.01.2022; the order passed by the appellate authority as contained in letter No.V-14013/BSL/CISF/LEGAL/AKS/2021-6843-(E) dated 20.11.2021 as also the order passed by the Disciplinary Authority as contained in letter No. V-15014/CISF/BSL/Admn.-II/A.K.Singh/Major/21-841 dated 25.08.2021 whereby and whereunder punishment of “reduction of pay by one stage from Rs.35,300/- in Level 4 of Pay Matrix to Rs.34,300/- in Level 4 of Pay Matrix for a period of one year with immediate effect; and it was directed that he will not earn increment of pay during the period of reduction and on expiry of the above period, the reduction will have the effect of postponing his future increments of pay” was awarded to the petitioner.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the punishment imposed upon the petitioner, i.e., lowering of his pay by one stage in pay matrix is absolutely illegal. He submitted that petitioner had no other option, but to leave the Quarantine Centre during the Covid period because, it was necessary for him to repair the phone as no one was there. He took all precautions and thereafter returned. He pleaded that the second charge leveled against the petitioner cannot be said to be a misconduct as the petitioner had already been earlier punished for the same. Learned counsel for the petitioner further pleaded that necessary documents were not handed over to the petitioner, thus, he could not defend his case properly. Petitioner also claimed that the Enquiry Officer was bias and his prayer to change the Enquiry Officer was not adhered to.

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Union of India submitted that in a Departmental Proceeding, petitioner was inflicted the punishment of lowering of pay by one stage. He argued that the statutory appeal was considered and the same was rejected by a reasoned order and so was the revision also. He contended that this Court sitting in a writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot reappraise the facts. There is no procedural illegality in the departmental enquiry. He further argued that the punishment is neither harsh nor disproportionate, therefore, no interference is necessary.

4. Petitioner is a member of a Disciplined Force. He is in Central Industrial Security Force. He is a Constable. The petitioner was proceeded against departmentally. There were two charges against the petitioner. The first charge is that he was found Covid Positive and he was immediately shifted to the Executive Hostel in a separate room for isolation on 29.04.2021. On 01.05.2021 at about 10.30 when checking was being conducted, this petitioner was found missing from his room. He had, in fact, left the isolation centre and was mixing with the civilians. After some time, he was seen entering the Executive Hostel in a two wheeler, thus, he disobeyed the orders and acted irresponsibly being a Covid infected patient. The second charge was that on earlier occasions he was already inflicted three minor punishments, but inspite of that he did not mend himself.

5. From the records I find that the Enquiry Officer, after a proper enquiry and giving full opportunity to the petitioner came to the conclusion that the charge against the petitioner is proved. Petitioner was given an opportunity and thereafter the impugned order of punishment was passed by which the pay scale of the petitioner was reduced by one stage. Petitioner preferred a departmental appeal. The grounds and submissions which were urged by the petitioner were duly considered by the Appellate Authority and his appeal was dismissed. The Revisional Authority also considered the entire defence of the petitioner and dismissed the revision application of the petitioner.

6. While going through the punishment order, appellate order and revisional order