* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on: 17.01.2025 Pronounced on: 03.04.2025 + W.P.(C) 10601/2022 AARTI MATHUR .....Petitioner Through: Mr. P. Sureshan, Adv.

versus UNION OF INDIA THROUGH DIRECTOR GENERAL CISF & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Bhagwan Swurup Shukla, CGSC with Mr. Sarvan Kumar, Adv. with Mr. G.S. Rathore- AC/CISF, Mr. Prahlad Devendra, SI/CISF & Mr. A.N.

Choubey, CISF.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINDER KAUR

J U D G M E N T

SHALINDER KAUR, J.

1. The present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following reliefs: -

“a) To quash and set aside the final order No. 9069 dated 20/11/2019 passed by the Dy. Inspector General CISF Wz- AP HQRS Navi Mumbai, appellate order No.1121 dated 23.12.2020 passed by the IG, APS-II CISF APS-II HQRS Bangalore and Revisional Order No. 9515 dated 29.9.2021 passed by the ADG, CISF APS HQRS, New Delhi Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed W.P. (C) 10601/2022 Page 1 of 14 whereby the petitioner had been punished with a major penalty of “REDUCTION OF PAY BY ONE STATE i.e FROM RS. 36,500 TO RS 35 400 (AS PER 7TH CPC MATRIX, LEVEL-6) FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR WITH IMMEDIATE EFFECT WITH FURTHER DIRECTION THAT SHE WILL NOT EARN INCREMENTS OF PAY DURING THE PERIOD OF REDUCTION AND THAT ON EXPIRY OF THIS PERIOD, THE REDUCTION WILL HAVE THE EFFECT OF POSTPONING HER FUTURE INCREMENTS OF PAY”

b) Pass an order granting all consequential benefit to the petitioner including full wages during the period of suspension, treating the period of suspension as period spend on duty and also paying the entire back wages.

c) Pass an order by exonerating the petitioner from all charges issued to her vide memorandum of charge dated 17.06.2019.

d) Quash and set aside the order dated 20.4.2020 with sub: EXTENSION OF PROBATION PERIOD IN CISF REG: issued by the respondent No.6 e) Direct the respondents to pay cost of this litigation to the petitioner.

f) Any other further order/relief which is Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be passed in favour of the petitioner and as against the respondent.”

2. To appreciate the nature of the challenge, it would be necessary to record the factual position, that is, the petitioner was appointed as a Lady Sub-Inspector (SI)(Executive) in the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) on 12.01.2018. Upon completion of her initial training at the National Industrial Security Academy (NISA), Hyderabad, she was posted at the CISF Unit ASG, Goa Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed W.P. (C) 10601/2022 Page 2 of 14 Airport, where she reported for duty on 21.01.2019.

3. The incident in question occurred on 12.06.2019, when the petitioner was deployed for the „A‟ shift from 05:30 to 13:00 hours at the Domestic Security Holding Area (SHA) of ASG Goa, Airport.

4. At approximately 06:46 hours, a passenger, namely Mr. Rajesh Kumar Mishra, who was travelling from Goa to Delhi, forgot his “Silver-Colored Cross Pen” in a tray at the time of his frisking and proceeded to the boarding gate. The petitioner found the said pen in the tray and took it to the ladies' Frisking booth No. 2.

5. Later, the said passenger returned and informed the SHA Inspector-in-Charge, Lady Inspector Swapnali Patil, about his missing pen, which he had forgotten in the tray during the security check.As the said pen could not be found at the time, he requested the Lady Inspector Swapnali Patil that if his pen was found, it be handed over to his colleague, Mr. Vishwanath S, who was travelling from the said airport later on the same day.

6. Subsequent thereto, the petitioner, while returning after finishing breakfast, met with the Lady Inspector Swapnali Patil, who informed her about the missing pen, to which the petitioner, at that time, did not respond. After their conversation, the petitioner rushed towards the booth, took the pen and handed it over to the Lady Inspector Swapnali Pat