Nakul Chandra Das vs State of Tripura

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2022 Supreme(Tri) 48

INDRAJIT MAHANTY, S. G. CHATTOPADHYAY
Nakul Chandra Das – Appellant
Versus
State of Tripura – Respondent

Advocates appeared:
Mr. Kohinoor N Bhattacharya, Advocate, for the Appellant; Mr. Mangal Debbarma, Addl. GA, for the Respondent

Table of Content
1. disciplinary proceedings for unauthorized absence. (Para 2 , 3)
2. appellant's defense and procedural errors. (Para 4 , 5 , 6)
3. court's analysis of disciplinary process and findings. (Para 7 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 22)
4. arguments regarding health and claim standards. (Para 8 , 21)
5. judgment quashing previous penalty and allowing entitlement. (Para 24 , 25)

JUDGMENT

S.G. Chattopadhyay, J. - The writ appeal arises from the judgment and order dated 28.09.2018 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) No.425 of 2014.

2. Factual background of the case is as under:

Appellant who was a rifleman (G.D.) in the 7th Battalion of Tripura State Rifles (TSR) remained absent in duty for 529 days from 04.02.2012 to 17.07.2013 without any intimation to his authority for which a disciplinary proceeding was drawn up against him in terms of Rule 14 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 read with Rule 40 of the TSR (Discipline, Control, Service Conditions etc.) Rules, 1986 for imposition of major penalty. An inquiry officer was appointed to hold enquiry into the articles of charges framed against the appellant and the inquiry officer after holding inquiry in terms of the procedur