Reportable

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7087 OF 2002

Union of India & Ors.

….

Appellants

Versus

Bishamber Das Dogra

….

Respondent

J U D G M E N T

Dr. B.S. Chauhan, J.

1.

This Appeal has been filed against the Judgment and Order of

the Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court dated 31^st January,

2002 in FMAT No. 1370 of 1992 by which it affirmed the judgment

and order dated 16^th July, 1991 of the learned Single Judge passed

in Civil Order No.3885 W of 1987 setting aside the order of

punishment of removal awarded by the Disciplinary Authority to the

respondent employee.

2.

The facts and circumstances giving rise to this appeal are that

respondent joined the service as Security guard in Central

Industrial Security Force (CISF) in August, 1980. He remained

absent from duty without seeking permission or leave, thus, vide

order dated 12^th August, 1984, he was awarded the entry of censure

for the same. Respondent was again punished for remaining

absent from duty for three days vide Order dated 22^nd July, 1985

withholding one annual increment for two years. The respondent

again absented himself from duty from 31^st August, 1985 to 8^th

September, 1985 i.e. for six days for which vide Order dated 5^th

September, 1985, he was imposed the punishment of withholding of

one annual increment for three years. The respondent again

deserted the LINE for the period from 6.3.1986 to 16.3.1986 i.e. 10

days for which he was issued a Show Cause Notice under Rule 34

of CISF Rules on 22/24.3.1986. The said notice could not be

served upon him as the respondent again deserted the LINE for a

period of 50 days, from 21.3.1986 to 10.5.1986 and joined the

service on 11^th May, 1986. Therefore, he could be served the show-

cause notice dated 22/24.3.1986 on 15^th May, 1986. The

respondent submitted his reply to the show cause notice. However,

as it was not found satisfactory, a regular departmental

enquiry was initiated against him. During the

2

pendency of the enquiry, the respondent again deserted the LINE

for 11 days from 6.6.1986 to 16.6.1986. The Enquiry Officer

concluded the enquiry and submitted the report which was

accepted by the Disciplinary Authority who vide order dated

17.6.1986 imposed the punishment of removal from service. While

passing the punishment Order, the Disciplinary authority also took

into consideration the past conduct of the respondent.

3.

Being aggrieved, the respondent preferred the Statutory

Appeal which was dismissed by the Appellate Authority vide order

dated 19.10.1986 observing that the respondent had not completed

six years in service but had deserted the LINE five times. Thus no

lenient view was permissible.

4.

Being aggrieved, the respondent-employee preferred the

revision before the Statutory Authority. However, during the

pendency of the said revision, he filed Writ Petition No. 3885 of

1987 before the Calcutta High Court. The learned Single Judge

vide Judgment and Order dated 16.7.1991 allowed the writ petition,

quashing the order of punishment on the ground that the copy of

3

the enquiry report was not furnished and the respondent employee

was not given the opportunity to file the objections to the same.

More so, his past conduct could not have been taken into

consideration while imposing the punishment.

5.

Aggrieved, the present appellants filed F.M.A.T. No. 1370 of

1992 before the Calcutta High Court which was dismissed by the

Division Bench by Judgment and Order dated 31^st January, 2002.

Hence, this appeal.

6.

Shri SWA Qadri, learned counsel appearing for the appellants

has submitted that the respondent employee remained absent from

duty without any justification or leave for more than five times

within a short span of less than six ye