LAWS(P&H)-2011-4-444

OMBIR SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

Decided On April 26, 2011
OMBIR SINGH Appellant
V/S
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The unsuccessful applicant-petitioner has filed the instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging order dated 13.12.2006 (P-8), passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh (for brevity, 'the Tribunal') dismissing the original application and upholding the order dated 29.9.2004 removing him from service (P-5) and subsequent orders dated 4.3.2005 (P-6) and 9.11.2005 (P-7) rejecting his statutory appeal and revision. The applicant-petitioner has also sought quashing of inquiry report dated 31.3.2004 (P-3) being violative of Articles 14, 16 and 311 of the Constitution.

(2.) The applicant-petitioner was working as a Warder in the Model Jail, Burail, Chandigarh. On 28.8.2000, an FIR No. 73, under Sections 124-A and 153-A IPC was registered against him at Police Station Morinda, with the allegations that one Balwant Singh Raioana, an under-trial prisoner in the assassination case of Punjab's Chief Minister Late Shri Beant Singh, gave him a written note on a paper to fax it to outside India at Fax No. 0044-1162731588. On seeing the police party the applicant-petitioner is stated to have raised slogans "Khalistan Zindabad" (P-1). In the criminal trial he was acquitted of the charges levelled against him by the Additional Sessions Judge, Rupnagar, vide judgment dated 1.2.2002 (P-2).

(3.) On 2.3.2002, the applicant-petitioner was reinstated in service. On 5.3.2002, the Superintendent, Model Jail, Chandigarh, served upon him a charge sheet under Section 15 of the Punjab Prisons State Service (Class-III) Executive Rules, 1963 (for brevity, 'the 1963 Rules') read with the punishments enumerated under Rule 8 of the Punjab Civil Services (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1970 (for brevity, 'the 1970 Rules') and Rule 10 of the Punjab Jails Department Executive (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1948 (for brevity, 'the 1948 Rules'). A regular departmental inquiry was held against him.