Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 2870
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
M.S. Latif, Prasant Kumar, JJ
Abdul Gani Mir – Appellant
Versus
Home Department – Respondent
O.A./331/2022
Mr. Z.A.Qureshi, Sr. Advocate; with Ms. Rehana Fayaz. Mr. Waseem Gul, GA.
The failure to adhere to procedural requirements and principles of natural justice in a departmental enquiry renders the termination of service invalid.
Headnote:(A) J&K Police Manual - Rules 339 and 359 - Termination of service - Applicant removed from service without following principles of natural justice and procedural requirements - Enquiry conducted without providing necessary documents and opportunity to defend - Orders quashed, fresh enquiry directed. (Paras 12, 13, 14)
(B) Natural Justice - Right to cross-examine witnesses and receive evidence - Denial of opportunity to defend constitutes violation of principles of natural justice. (Paras 10, 11)
Facts of the case:
The applicant was removed from service following a departmental enquiry after an incident where arms were snatched during an attack on a guard post. The applicant contended that the enquiry was flawed and violated procedural rules.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the enquiry did not adhere to the required procedures and principles of natural justice, leading to the quashing of the termination orders.
Issues: The main issues were whether the enquiry was conducted fairly and in accordance with the rules, and whether the applicant was given a reasonable opportunity to defend himself.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the failure to provide the enquiry report and the opportunity to cross-examine witnesses constituted a breach of natural justice, necessitating the quashing of the termination order.
Result: The impugned orders were set aside, and a fresh enquiry was directed.
ORDER
M.S.Latif, Member (Judl.) :-
Through the medium of this OA the applicant has prayed for grant of following relief:-
“8(i) Quash the order no. 371 of 2020 dated 19.09.2020 issued by Inspector General of Police Armed/IRP Kashmir, Srinagar, by which in exercise of the powers conferred under Rule 339 of J&K Police Manual, the applicant was removed from the services with immediate effect and
(ii) The order no. 121 of 2022 dated 11.02.2022 by which the appeal of the applicant was dismissed and confirming the order dated 19.09.2020 be also quashed and in consequent thereto
(iii) The applicant be treated to have been on duty as if the order of termination was never passed and applicant be granted all consequential benefits attached to the post including salary, increment, promotion, etc.
(iv) Pass any other or further order(s) as this Hon’ble Tribunal deems fit and proper, in the facts and circumstances of the case.”
2. Case of the applicant, as projected in the OA, is as under:-
2.1 Applicant was deployed at Gori Shanker Temple, Goripora Rawalpora among others for security of the said temple. On 25.04.2018, after receiving a phone call that condition of his son has deteriorated, he left for his home after informing higher authorities from where he took his son to the hospital for proper treatment. The same day during evening hours, some unknown gunmen attacked the said guard post, barged into the guard room and snatched the Arms/Ammunitions allotted to the deployed guard personnel including the applicant. Acting upon the information a case FIR No.97 of 2018 dated 25.04.2018, U/s 457, 392 RPC 7/27 Arms act and 30- PEPO was registered in P/s Budgam.
2.2 Consequent to the aforesaid incident the applicant along with other officials was placed under suspension vide order No. 473 of 2018 dated 26.04.2018 and one Mr. Ashfaq Alam, Dy.SP (C.C.B.Coy) was directed to hold a departmental enquiry under rules and furnish th detailed report to the office of Commandant JKAP 13 Bn. Subsequently, appointment of aforesaid Dy. SP as enquiry officer was withdrawn by Addl. Director General of Police, Armed, J&K Srinagar vide order dated 23.05.2018 and departmental enquiry was th entrusted to Commandant JKAP-12 Bn against applicant and rest of the Guards.
2.3 It is alleged by the applicant that after the respondent no.5 was appointed as Enquiry Officer, he recorded some evidence in absence of the applicant and other Guards who were placed under suspension and thereafter framed the charges against the applicant on 06.09.2018. The reply to the charge was submitted by the applicant whereby he denied the charges as not being framed in accordance with the facts and circumstances (Annexure-VII).
2.4 After two years of service of charge sheet dated 08.09.2018, the Inspector General of Police issued a show cause notice on 07.09.2020 (Annexure-VIII) by exercising his powers vested in him under Rule 359(11)(2) of J&K Police Manual calling upon the applicant as to why he should not be removed from the service on the grounds as mentioned in the notice. It is alleged that respondent no.4 did not provide the enquiry report, recommendation or the documents on the basis of which the grounds for show cause were relied upon.
2.5 On 19.09.2020 vide order no. 371 of 2020 (Annexure-I) Inspector General of Police, Armed/IRP Kashmir, passed a detailed order removing the applicant and other three officials from the service with immediate effect by invoking the powers under Rule 339 of the J&K Police Manual. It was further ordered that the finding of the enquiry officer shall form part of the order. It is averred in the OA that even the finding of the enquiry officer was not provided to the applicant.
2.6 The applicant feeling aggrieved of the aforesaid order, which was passed without following the principles of natural justice, mandate of Rule 359 of J&K Police Rules coupled with Rule 339 of J&K Police Manual, preferred a review petition. However, the same was rejected vide order no.
