BABU RAM Vs. UOI AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner aggrieved by the order of removal from service dated 23.12.2002 passed by Commandant had filed the appeal before the appellate authority Inspector General of Police, CRPF but before its disposal, he also filed the instant writ petition. During the pendency of the writ petition, the appellate authority has rejected the appeal of the petitioner vide order dated 01.08.2003.

(2.) The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the respondent authorities have not followed the procedure prescribed instead in an arbitrary manner penalty has been imposed. In opposition, learned counsel for the respondents stated that the procedure has been meticulously followed. Petitioner has participated at every stage of the enquiry and disciplinary proceedings, it is only thereafter a well considered order has been passed. Therefore, petition is liable to be dismissed.

(3.) Considered the submissions as well as the record of the petition and the record as produced by the learned counsel for the respondents. In terms of Rule 27 of the CRPF Rules, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as Rules), the Commandant is the competent disciplinary authority to pass the order of penalty after formal departmental enquiry.