O R D E R

The writ petition is filed challenging the order of punishment.

2. The writ petitioner joined as Constable in the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) in the year 2006. While the petitioner was working at Central Industrial Security Force Unit NMPT, Mangalore, a charge memorandum under Rule 36 of the Central Industrial Security Force Rules, 2001 [hereinafter referred to as the 'CISF Rules, 2001', in short] was issued in proceedings dated 01.12.2012, framing the following article of charge:-

Article of Charges-I “That No.064840066 Constable Jitender Singh Parmar of CISF Unit NMPT-Mangalore exhibited gross misconduct and serious act of indiscipline in that while he was performing 'C' shift duty from 2100 hrs on 10.11.2012 to 0500 hers on 11.11.2012 at Delta-II (Atul) marine patrolling boat with Arms and ammunitions, consumed alcohol in the boat along with No.001480285 Constable Sarepaka Nageswara Rao who has been deployed for duty along with him in the same boat, at about 2320 hrs on 10.11.2012. This act on the part of No.064840066 Constable Jitender Singh Parmar CISF Unit, NMPT-Mangalore tantamount to gross indiscipline, dereliction of duty, violation of standing order for boat patrolling and act of unbecoming of the member of an Armed Force of Union”

3. The petitioner submitted his written statement of defence denying the allegations. Not satisfied with the explanation, the Disciplinary Authority appointed an Enquiry Officer, who in turn conducted an enquiry by affording an opportunity to the writ petitioner. The petitioner participated in the process of enquiry and defended his case. The Enquiry Officer submitted his report holding that the charges are proved against the writ petitioner. Based on the proved charges, the Disciplinary Authority imposed the punishment of withholding of one increment for a period of one year, which will have the effect of postponing of future increments of pay.

4. Thereafter, the fourth respondent/Deputy Inspector General issued a show cause notice. The show cause notice states that the proved charges of consumption of liquor while on duty was a serious misconduct and there is absolutely no room for such personnel in any Armed Force. It states that the charged official has consumed alcohol while on boat patrolling duty on the sea with arms and ammunitions and therefore, it becomes a very serious misconduct. Although the Boat Master became hostile during regular enquiry, it is on record that he had initially deposed that the charged official had threatened him by pointing the rifle towards him when he declined to move the boat due to rain and the intoxicated condition of the charged official and Constable Sarepaka Nageswara Rao. Therefore, the act committed by the charged official is one of the serious offences deserving stringent punishment, but the Disciplinary Authority had taken a lenient view and awarded penalty of withholding of one year increment for a period of one year which will have the effect of postponing of future increments of pay. Therefore, the Appellate Authority proposed to enhance the penalty awarded by the Disciplinary Authority vide order dated

18.02.2013 to that of removal from service to meet the ends of justice.

5. The writ petitioner submitted his objections with reference to the show cause notice as well as for the reasons stated in the show cause notice. The Appellate Authority has not considered the explanations and passed the final orders in proceedings dated 07.08.2013, imposing the punishment of reduction of pay by the minimum stage for a period of five years with further direction that during the period of reduction he will not earn increment and on expiry of this period, the reduction will have the effect of postponing his future increments of pay.

6. The appeal petition filed by the writ petitioner was also rejected by the third respondent on 18.11.2013. Thus the petitioner filed a revision petition before the 2nd respondent / Revisional Authority, which w