W.P.(C) 1099/2020 Page 1 of 22

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%

Reserved on: 30th January, 2023

Pronounced on: 04th July, 2023

+

W.P.(C) 1099/2020 &CM APPL. 23338/2022

RAJESH KUMAR P V

..... Petitioner

Through:

Mr. Naushad Alam & Mr. Sandeep

Pathak, Advocates.

versus

UNION OF INDIA & ANR. ..... Respondents

Through:

Mr. Sushil Kumar Pandey, Sr.

Panel Counsel, Mr. Sahaj Garg,

Govt. Pleader & Mr. Kuldeep

Singh,

Advocate

with

Mr.

Hemendra Singh, DC Law BSF.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA

J U D G M E N T

NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J

1.

The petitioner has filed the present petition under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India to issue Writ of Certiorari to set aside the

Chargesheet dated 19.08.2017, Order of Sentence of “Severe Reprimand”

dated 21.08.2017, and also issue Writ of Mandamus to direct the

respondent No. 1 to notionally promote him to the Rank of AC/Elect.

against the vacancy year 2016-17 or 2017-18 or 2018-19 along with all

consequential benefits and seniority.

2.

The facts in brief as narrated in the present petition are that the

petitioner is presently working as Inspector/Junior Engineer (Electrical)

with the Border Security Force (hereinafter referred to as “BSF”) and is

Digitally Signed

By:SAHIL SHARMA

Signing Date:04.07.2023

12:14:22

Signature Not Verified

W.P.(C) 1099/2020 Page 2 of 22

currently posted at STS-BSF, Tigri, New Delhi. While working as Junior

Engineer, a Summary Trial was initiated against him by DIG, Barmar and

he was served with Chargesheet dated 14.10.2016 and was charged with

two charges under Border Security Force Act 1968 (hereinafter referred

to as the “Act, 1968”), namely: Section 35(a) for knowingly making a

false statement in a document signed by him; and Section 40 for

committing an omission prejudicial to good order and discipline of the

force.

3.

The DIG BSF, Barmar/respondent No. 2 directed preparation of the

Record of Evidence (ROE) which was completed on 10.12.2016 after

which the petitioner was absolved from all the charges on 31.12.2016 by

DIG BSF, Barmar on the ground that no evidence was found to

substantiate the charges levelled against him. Consequently, vide Letter

dated 02.01.2017 STS, BSF, New Delhi, the service record of the

petitioner was returned to Departmental Promotion Committee

(hereinafter referred to as “DPC”) for consideration for promotion to the

Rank of Assistant Commandant (Elec.) for the vacancy year 2016-2017.

4.

However, after about eight months, the Inquiry was re-initiated

against him for the same above-mentioned charges by the same DIG who

had conducted the first Chargesheet, despite having been already

exonerated, as the Charges had been found to be not substantiated by any

evidence. The second Chargesheet was issued on 19.08.2017 which

contained the same charges verbatim as mentioned in the first Chargesheet

dated 14.10.2016. However, no ROE was prepared after issuance of

second Chargesheet and the ROE prepared in the first Chargesheet was

used in the second Chargesheet.

Digitally Signed

By:SAHIL SHARMA

Signing Date:04.07.2023

12:14:22

Signature Not Verified

W.P.(C) 1099/2020 Page 3 of 22

5.

The petitioner, on directions filed Written Submissions in his

defence dated 21.08.2017. He was held guilty of both the Charges and

sentenced to “severe reprimand” on 21.08.2017, the copy of which is not

available with the petitioner.

6.

Thereafter, the petitioner filed a Representation dated 31.08.2017

through proper channel, which was rejected on 08.01.2018.