IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 28.10.2024 CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE N.MALA W.P. No.10200 of 2016 Ashok Kumar Yadav No.833450209, HC/GD CISF Unit KIOCL Mangalore ... Petitioner Vs

1.The Union of India Rep. by its Secretary to Government Ministry of Home Affairs New Delhi

2.The Director General Central Industrial Security Force CGO Complex Lodhi Road, New Delhi - 110 003

3.The Inspector General Central Industrial Security Force South Sector, Head Quarters Chennai Port Trust Campus Near War Memorial, Chennai - 600 009

4.The Deputy Inspector General Central Industrial Security Force Rajaji Bhawan, Besant Nagar Chennai - 600 090

5.The Group Commandant Central Industrial Security Force Group Head Quarters Cochin, Kerala State

6.The Assistant Commandant Central Industrial Security Force Unit KIOCL, Mangalore Karnataka State ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the order passed by the 6th respondent dated 01.09.2015 in his letter No.E-42099/CISF/KIOCL/Dis.Sec./2015/1228 returning the papers relating to the revision submitted to the 3rd respondent dated 27.08.2015 and quash the same and to direct the 3rd respondent to entertain the revision submitted by the petitioner on 27.08.2015 and hear the same on merits.

For Petitioner : Mr.A.S.Mujibur Rahman For Respondent : Mr.P.G.Santhoshkumar Senior Panel Counsel for R1 to R6

O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed to call for the records relating to the order passed by the 6th respondent dated 01.09.2015 in his letter No.E- 42099/CISF/KIOCL/Dis.Sec./2015/1228 returning the papers relating to the revision submitted to the 3rd respondent dated 27.08.2015, quash the same and to direct the 3rd respondent to entertain the revision submitted by the petitioner on 27.08.2015 and hear the same on merits.

2. The petitioner joined as constable in Central Industrial Security Force in the year 1983 and served all over India. The petitioner was issued with a charge memo under Rule 36 of CISF Rules, 2001 vide letter No.7853 dated 08.12.2014 by the fifth respondent. The petitioner submitted his written defence against the charge memo. As the reply of the petitioner was found to be unsatisfactory, the disciplinary authority, appointed an Enquiry Officer to enquire into the articles of charge. The Enquiry Officer, after completing the enquiry, submitted his report dated 29.01.2015 holding that the charges levelled against the petitioner were proved. The enquiry report was furnished to the petitioner on 07.02.2015 and he submitted his representation to the same on 17.02.2015. The disciplinary authority, vide order dated 04.03.2015, imposed a punishment of reduction of pay to the minimum stage of Rs.9,300/- in the Pay Band-II with Grade Pay Rs.4,200/- for a period of five years, with further direction that during the period of reduction he will not earn any increment and on expiry of the period, the reduction will have the effect of postponing his future increment.

3. According to the petitioner, the petitioner due to family problems could not file the appeal within the limitation period to the appellate authority. The petitioner, within the stipulated period of 180 days, preferred a revision before the revisional authority/3rd respondent, but beyond the time provided for appeal. The revisional authority, vide the impugned order dated 01.09.2015, returned the revision petition stating that the petitioner did not adopt the correct procedure and therefore, directed the petitioner to prefer an appeal to the Deputy Inspector General, CISF, Chennai. Aggrieved by the impugned order, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

4. The respondents filed a detailed counter reiterating the stand taken in the impugned order that the petitioner ought to have exhausted the appellate remedy before filing the revision petition. The respondents stated that no prejudice