Bhaskar Rana vs The Union Of India
2021 Latest Caselaw 3547 Jhar

                                  1

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                         W.P.(S) No.3350 of 2012
               Bhaskar Rana                 ...   ...    Petitioner
                               Versus
        1.     The Union of India.
        2.     The Inspector General of Police, CISF, East Part
               Headquarter, Boring Road, Patna, Bihar.
        3.     The Deputy Inspector General of Police, CISF, Central
               Coalfields Limited Unit, Kargali, Bokaro.
        4.     The Commandant, CISF, Central Coalfields Limited
               Unit, Kargali, Bokaro.           ...    ... Respondents
                                      -------

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN

-------

For the Petitioner :Mr. Samavesh Bhanj Deo, Adv. For the Respondents :Ms. Vibha Bakshi, A.C. to ASGI

-------

Through:- Video Conferencing

-------

12/22.09.2021 Heard learned counsel for the parties through

V.C.

2. The instant writ application has been preferred by

the petitioner praying therein for quashing the punishment

order as contained in Memo No.1554 dated 24.02.2011

(Annexure-4) issued by the Commandant, CISF, CCL Unit,

Kargali whereby punishment has been imposed upon the

petitioner with reduction of pay to the lower stage. He further

prays for quashing the appellate order as contained in Memo

No.96 dated 28.06.2011 whereby the appeal preferred by the

petitioner has been rejected and order of punishment has

been upheld and also for quashing the Revisional order as

contained in memo No.13384 dated 31.12.2011 (Annexure-6).

3. After some arguments Mr. Samavesh Bhanj Deo,

learned counsel for the petitioner seeks liberty to approach

the concerned respondent/authority only on the issue of

quantum of punishment as the punishment imposed upon

the petitioner is not commensurate with the charge proved.

4. Ms. Vibha Bakshi learned counsel for the

respondent though support the impugned order and submits

that the same has been passed with due care and caution,

however if the petitioner files a representation only on the

question of quantum of punishment then the same shall be

considered in the light of documents and judgments relied

upon by him.

5. In view of the limited submissions of the parties,

without going into merit of the case; the instant writ

application is, hereby, disposed of by giving liberty to the

petitioner to approach the concerned respondent/authority

for consideration of his representation with regard to

quantum of punishment. If any such representation is filed

within a period of Six weeks from today, the same shall be

considered in accordance with law, rule & regulation as well

as in the light of the judgments/documents supplied by the

petitioner along with his representation, within a period of 12

weeks from the date of receipt of such representation.

6. With the aforesaid observations, the instant writ

application stands disposed of.

(Deepak Roshan, J.) Fahim/-