Subash Kumar vs Union Of India & Ors
2013 Latest Caselaw 4613 Del

$~22
*    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                          +     W.P.(C) 6323/2013

                          Date of Decision: 4th October, 2013


      SUBASH KUMAR                                  ..... Petitioner
                  Through :            Ms. Jyoti Singh, Adv.

                          versus

      UNION OF INDIA & ORS                         ..... Respondent
                    Through :          Mr. Amrit Pal Singh, Adv. for R1-5.


      CORAM:
      HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE GITA MITTAL
      HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA

GITA MITTAL,J. (Oral)

1. The petitioner in the instant case was subjected to disciplinary proceedings which culminated in an order dated 27 th April, 2010 imposing upon him the punishment of Compulsory retirement from service with full pension, gratuity and retirement benefits. The petitioner challenged the order dated 27th April, 2010 by way of an appeal filed before the Deputy Inspector General (NZ), CISF, Saket, New Delhi. The Appellate Authority vide its order dated 6th August, 2010 had reduced the penalty of compulsory retirement of service to that of reduction of pay by two stages for two years with cumulative effect.

2. It is noteworthy that on 6th July, 2009, vide FIR No. 43/2009, a case

was registered against the petitioner and his family members at Police Station Kihar, District Chamba, under Sections 427, 436 and 34 IPC. Petitioner was arrested in the above said FIR on 6th July, 2009. He remained in judicial custody till he was granted bail on 29 th July, 2009. The petitioner was placed under suspension in respect of the criminal proceedings which had been initated against him in respect of FIR No. 43/2009.

3. The criminal proceedings have since culminated in an order dated 28th June, 2011 whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge acquitted the petitioner of the charges levelled against him. A perusal of the order would show that the court has arrived at a finding that the petitioner was on duty and was not present at the spot at the time of alleged occurrence. It is evident, therefore, that the petitioner was a victim of false implication in a criminal case.

4. In this background, the petitioner had filed a Revision Petition before the Inspector General/ North Sector against the order dated 6th August, 2010 submitting that he was implicated in a false complaint. The Appellate Authority set aside the penalty order of compulsory retirement of the petition and awarded the punishment of reduction of the pay by two stages for two years with cumulative effect.

5. Vide the impugned order dated 26th December, 2011, the Revisional Authority dismissed the Revision Petition on the ground that the same was time barred.

6. Given the facts and circumstances in which the revision was filed, we are of the view that the rejection of the revision petition on the ground of the same being time barred was not in the interest of justice. The same deserves to be considered on merits.

7. We also find that after disposal of the writ petition, the petitioner has sent legal notice dated 27th March, 2012. Thereafter when no reply to the said legal notice was received by the petitioner, he approached the respondents by submitting another representation dated 12 th February, 2013 before the Director of General, CISF HQ, CGO Complex, Lodhi Road.

8. Vide a communication dated 23rd April, 2013, the respondents replied that "the needful action has already been taken by the department". The respondents have therefore, not considered the facts brought out in the judgment dated 28th June, 2011. The judicial pronouncement has acquitted the petitioner holding that the petitioner was on duty with the respondents at the time of alleged occurrence. This is a material fact which supports the petitioner's contention that the punishment imposed by the respondents by the order dated 27th April, 2010, as modified by the Appellate Authority by the order dated 6th August, 2010 was unjustified and deserves to be set aside.

In view of the above, we direct as follows:-

(i) The order dated 26th December, 2011 and Communication sent by the respondents dated 23 rd April, 2013 are hereby set aside and quashed.

(ii) A direction is issued to the respondents to treat the revision petition of the petitioner and as well as legal notice dated 27th March, 2012 and the representation dated 12th February, 2013 on merits and passed a reasoned and speaking order thereon within a period of four weeks from today.

(iii) The order which is passed by the respondent No. 3 shall be communicated to the petitioner forthwith, who shall be at liberty to assail the same and all other actions of the respondents by way of appropriate legal proceedings as per law in case he is aggrieved by the same.

9. This petition is disposed of in the above terms.

Dasti GITA MITTAL, J

DEEPA SHARMA, J OCTOBER 04, 2013 j