- (1.) Heard Shri Ashutosh Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Upendra Nath Sharma, learned counsel for the respondents.
(2.) The petitioner-Naseem Ahmad underwent disciplinary proceedings on account of overstay after having taken leave. The petitioner was subjected to an inquiry but the disciplinary authority disagreeing with the Enquiry Officer's report proceeded to impose the punishment of dismissal on the petitioner vide order dated 7th July, 1999. The petitioner preferred an appeal against the same and the same was allowed on 24th November, 1999 by the following order: ".............. Therefore, I find that the departmental enquiry conducted against the appellant is not just and fair. In view of the above procedural irregularities, which are against instructions on the subject as well as principle of the natural justice, the departmental enquiry conducted against No. 851190409 Ex CT Nasim Ahmed of 130 Bn by the Commandant 130 Bn CRPF vide his office order No. P. VIII-11/98-130-EC-II dated 31.10.98 is hereby quashed and a denovo enquiry is ordered for his OSL for 76 days from 19.7.98 to 2.10.98. Said No. 851190409 Ex. CT Nasim Ahmed of 130 Bn is hereby re-instated into service with the direction to report in the unit within thirty (30) days from the date of issue of this order. Intervening period from the date of dismissal from service till the date of reporting in the unit be treated as DIES-NON."
(3.) It is, therefore, clear that the appeal was allowed and the petitioner was to be tried again in the inquiry proceedings denovo. The petitioner was served with a notice on 6th January, 2000 that he may report or else he was not to be given any further opportunity. The respondents have come out with a case that the petitioner failed to report for duty and, therefore, the impugned order was passed on 14th Feburary, 2000 cancelling the earlier order of the appellate authority dated 24.11.1999.;