$~81 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision :14^th January, 2026 + W.P.(C) 442/2026 CM APPL. 2122/2026 WASNIK ISHANT RAJENDRA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Mandeep Baisala, Mr. Dhanajay Singh, Mr. Atal Singh, Mr. Kavesh Bidhuri, Mr. Shobhit Anand, Advs.

versus UNOIN OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Brijesh Yadav, SPC, Mr. Jitendra Kumar Tripathi, GP.

Mr. Krishana M, AC, Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Inspector, Mr. Sandeep, CT, CISF.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA V. KAMESWAR RAO , J. (ORAL)

1. This petition has been filed with the following prayers:

“In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may Kindly be pleased to issue:

i. Issue a writ of Certiorari, or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction, quashing the impugned Unit Service Order No. V- 15014(3)/CISF/FBP(F)/L&D/2021/11267 dated 23.11.2021 issued by Respondent No. 2, and the appellate order No. V-11014/KAUSUB/S.E.Z-I/ADMN- II/APPEAL-10/WIR/2022/3955 dated 19.05.2022 issued by Respondent No. 3, whereby the Petitioner was removed from service and his statutory appeal was rejected as time barred;

ii. Further, direct Respondents No. 1 to 3 to reinstate the Petitioner to the post of Constable (GD) in the CISF, along with all consequential service benefits, including seniority, increments, and allowances. …”

2. In effect, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 23.11.2021 passed by the Disciplinary Authority and also the order dated 19.05.2022 passed by the Appellate Authority, whereby, the petitioner has been imposed penalty of removal from service and his statutory appeal was rejected as being time barred.

3. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, it is conceded position that the petitioner was issued a charge-sheet for certain misdemeanors which included that the petitioner, who was deployed for PTL duty in Watch Tower 03 and 04, during the night shift of 20.06.2021, upon being checked by Sub Inspector/Dependence Gurvinder Singh, he was found sleeping in a semiconscious state on the floor of Watch Tower 04 after consuming alcohol, with his shoes, belt and pants unhooked.

4. The allegations also reveal that he was punished with six minor punishments for indiscipline, negligence, dereliction of duty and violation of lawful orders during his period of service.

5. It is found that the misdemeanors in the past includes he was found sleeping while on duty; non completing the training during the drill TOT course; found in a drunken state while on duty.

6. It is a conceded position that the charges against the petitioner have been proved. The Disciplinary Authority while passing the order on

23.11.2021 has keeping in view the findings against the petitioner has imposed the penalty of removal on him.

7. The appellate authority order dated 19.05.2022 inter alia reads as under:

“3.⁠ ⁠AND WHEREAS, the appellant had received the charge memorandum on 07.08.2021 and did not submit his reply against the charge memorandum within the prescribed time limits of 10 days. Hence, he was given another 03 days more time to submit his reply vide letter date 18.08.2021 but again he did not submit reply against the charge memorandum. As such disciplinary authority felt necessary to conduct an enquiry into the allegation levelled against him to bring out the facts of the allegation. Accordingly, the disciplinary appointed EO & PO vide order dated 24.08.2021. EO conducted the enquiry on day to day basis. The appellant had attended the preliminary hearing and enquiry proceedings and EO had given him the opportunity to cross examine the witnesses but he denied it. After, recording the statement of prosecution witnesses, the defense statement of the appellant was recorded by the EO. A copy of PO Brie was also supplied to the appellant on 24.09.2021 and charged official submitted his brief report to the EO on 29.09.2021. After completion of the DE proceedings, t