UNION OF INDIA Vs. SUNIL KUMAR SARKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A General Court-Martial (GCM) under the provisions of the Army Act, 1950 was initiated against the respondent herein for certain allegations of defrauding the Border Road Organisation ('the Organisation') in which the respondent was working as a Superintendent, Buildings and Roads, Grade-II. On the conclusion of the said GCM proceedings, he was found guilty of some of the charges framed against him and was sentenced to undergo R.I. for one year which sentence under the Army Act was subject to confirmation by the higher authorities under Chapter XII of the Army Act. Pursuant to the said sentence, the respondent was taken into custody on the very day i.e. 28th July, 1976. When the conviction and sentence was taken up by the confirming authority, same was remanded back to the GCM for reconsideration. On remand, the GCM again heard the respondent's counsel and modified its earlier order whereby while finding the respondent again guilty reduced the earlier sentence of R.I. for one year to that of six months. This order was also subject to confirmation. However, in view of the fact that the respondent who by virtue of the first order was undergoing the sentence, had completed the period of six months by that time, the GCM directed the release of the respondent from custody on 28th January, 1977. The second order of conviction was confirmed by the authority concerned on 26-3-1977.

(2.) In the meantime, the authorities acting under Rule 19 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965 (for short 'the Central Rules') with a view to initiate disciplinary proceedings issued a show cause notice dated 26-3-1977 calling upon him to show cause why suitable order be not passed against him. The respondent submitted his reply to the said show cause notice. The authority on the conclusion of the said departmental inquiry under the said Rule dismissed the respondent from service. The appeals and the review petitions filed by the respondent to the appropriate authorities against his conviction by the GCM as well as his dismissal under the Central Rules came to be dismissed.

(3.) The respondent challenged these orders of his conviction under the Army Act as well as his dismissal under the Rules by way of a writ petition before a learned single Judge of the Calcutta High Court who, after hearing the parties, noticed certain defects in the orders impugned before him, hence, allowed the writ petition and issued the following directions :