SHRI RAJESH KUMAR ROY @ SRI RAJESH ROY Vs. THE UNION OF INDIA
HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
Shri Rajesh Kumar Roy @ Sri Rajesh Roy
THE UNION OF INDIA
Click here to view full judgement.
HRISHIKESH ROY,J. -
(1.) AND ORDER (Oral) - Heard Mr. P.J. Phukan, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. The respondents are represented by the learned Central Govt. counsel.
(2.) The petitioner is a former constable of the B/66 Battalion of the CRPF and he challenges the order dated 09.09.2009 (Annexure-E), whereby the punishment of stoppage of one increment for three years without cumulative effect, which was initially awarded by the Commandant was later enhanced to the punishment of compulsory retirement, by the Deputy Inspector General, CRPF, Bhubaneswar. For imposing the more severe penalty, the revisional power under Rule 29(d) of the Central Reserve Police Force Rules, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the "CRPF Rules"), was invoked by the officer.
(3.) 1 Questioning the legality of the enhanced punishment, the learned counsel Mr. P.J. Phukan submits that the DIG tried to justify his order on the basis of his personal opinion that the petitioner has a criminal mind and lacks tolerance but such opinion is not relatable to the past conduct of the delinquent or any evidence brought during the disciplinary proceeding. 3. 2 The failure of the officer to apply his mind to the relevant material is demonstrated by the petitioner's lawyer by pointing out that although no defence witness was adduced by the delinquent, the DIG mechanically referred to the statement of the defence witnesses, to give his decision. 3. 3 The petitioner contends that the Commandant of the Battalion rationally justified the initial punishment of stoppage of increment by commenting on the good service record of the delinquent, future career and the backdrop of the incident on 06.08.2008. But all these relevant factors were ignored by the higher authority, who acted suo moto to enhance the punishment.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.