The Division Judge Bench of the Rajasthan High Court, comprising Chief Justice Akil Kumar Kureshi and Justice Suresh Bansal in the case of Ramraj Meena v. Union of India & Ors has dismissed the appeal petition filed by a constable-driver in CRPF against the department enquiry done against him which resulted into removal of him from service.
Background of the Case
The appellant was engaged as a constable-driver in CRPF. He was granted leave from 21.08.2013 to 19.09.2013. He however did not report for duty on completion of leave period. He remained unauthorisedly absent without sanction of leave from 20.09.2013 on wards without any intimation to the department. The departmental enquiry was therefore initiated against him. He did not participate in the enquiry. Final order was passed by the disciplinary authority imposing punishment of dismissal.
Aggrieved by the punishment he filed petition in the Court which was dismissed by the Single Judge bench. Afterward he filed appeal against the order.
Submission of the Petitioner
The Counsel on the behalf of the petitioner has submitted that looking to the long clean service of the petitioner extreme punishment of removal from service should not have been imposed. He further submitted that the petitioner was suffering from illness on account of which he could not resume his duties. He lastly contended that none of the communications of the department reached to him because the petitioner was not living at his residence.
Reasoning and Decision of the Court
The Court perused the facts and circumstances of the case and observed that “the petitioner was engaged as constable of CRPF which is a disciplined force. He remained unauthorisedly absent without sanctioned leave or communication to the department for about one year. This was a clear case of misconduct.”
The Court further considered the merits of the case and expounded that for any such less heinous offences the punishment prescribed under Section 10 of the said Act is of imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year or with fine which may extend to three months’ pay, or with both. Section 11 pertains to minor punishments. Sub-section (1) of Section 11 provides that the commandant or any other authority or officer as may be prescribed, may, subject to any rules made under the Act, award in lieu of, or in addition to, suspension or dismissal any one or more of the punishments to any member of the force whom he considers to be guilty of disobedience, neglect of duty, or remissness in the discharge of the duty or any duty or other misconduct in his capacity as a member of the force. One of the punishments prescribed is removal from the office.
The Court dismissed the appeal petition and held that we do not find any reason to interfere. The case of punishment essentially rests with the disciplinary authority. The Court would not interfere unless the punishment shocks the conscience of the Court.
Case Details
Case: - D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 333/2022
Petitioner: - Ramraj Meena
Respondent: - The Union Of India & Ors
Judge: Chief Justice Akil Kumar Kureshi and Justice Suresh Bansal
Picture Source :
