In cases of dereliction of duty, the absence of an eyewitness does not preclude the establishment of misconduct, and the proportionality of punishment is a key consideration in disciplinary actions.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the order passed by the 3rd respondent in his order No.V-15014/L&R/SS/Rev/SMR/2013-130 dated 15.06.2013, confirming the order of the 4th respondent in his appellate order No.V-15014/NLC/Disc/Appeal-Maj/MSR/2012/13299 dated 29.12.2012 and upheld the order passed by the 5th respondent in his final order No.V-15014/NLC/Disc/Maj-MSR/2012/11001 dated 30.10.2012 to quash the same and to direct the respondents to release the increments reduced by the disciplinary authority and upheld by the appellate and revision authorities.)

The order of punishment of reduction of pay by two stages for a period of one year and the appellate order confirming the order of punishment are under challenge in the present writ petition.

2. The writ petitioner joined as Constable general duty in the Central Industrial Security Force at Visakhapatnam. He was posted at CISF Unit at NLC Neyveli and during the relevant point of time, a charge memo was issued in proceedings dated 02.02.2012 under rule 36 of the CISF Rules. The allegation against the petitioner was that he was deployed for 'C' shift duty from 2100 hours on 03.01.2012 to 0500 hours on 04.01.2012 at S Bridge Frame No.116 to S5-DH PTL of Mine-II ['J' Coy]. During his duty hours, 18 meters of able No.T366B [185 sq.mm] connected between Pillar Box 138 & Double Post erected opposite to Frame No.39 of S5 Conveyor Bench system, costing Rs.14,400/- was cut down and taken away by miscreants. The petitioner failed to provide protection to the material belong to NLC Neyveli for which he was posted for duty. The lapse was construed as gross misconduct, indiscipline, dereliction of duty and accordingly, charge memo was issued. The writ petitioner submitted his explanation defending the allegations. Not satisfied with the explanation, an Enquiry Officer was appointed, who in turn conducted an enquiry by affording an opportunity to the writ petitioner and the Enquiry Officer submitted his report holding that the articles of charges against the petitioner are held to be proved. Based on the proved charges, the punishment of reduction of pay by two stages for a period of one year was imposed. The writ petitioner preferred an appeal and the Appellate Authority also rejected the same on merits. Further, the revision preferred by the petitioner was also rejected.

3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner mainly contended that the writ petitioner on joining duty at NLC on the first day the incident occurred, he had no thorough knowledge about the location and therefore, he had not committed any act intentionally. The Enquiry Officer has not considered these facts and circumstances while forming an opinion that the charges are held proved. The petitioner has raised several grounds including that he has not committed any lapse or dereliction while he was on duty. The learned counsel reiterated that no criminal case has been registered with reference to the offence of theft and there was no eye witness and in the absence of any such evidence, the finding of the Enquiry Officer is untenable.

4. The learned Central Government Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents objected the said contention by stating that if at all the petitioner had colluded or a criminal case has been registered, the punishment would have been major in nature. In view of the fact that there was a lapse and dereliction of duty the authorities have viewed leniently and imposed the punishment of reduction in pay by two stages for one year. The lapses are established based on the complaint by the subsequent shift CISF Constable that a particular portion of the cable were missing and it was stolen. Therefore, the CISF duty personnel who were posted subsequently traced out the theft and informed to the officials who in turn conducted a field enquiry and noticed t