- (1.) The Petitioner was a Government Officer in Indian Air Force in the Medical Branch and was appointed as such on 17-8 -- 1983. On 21-8-87 the Petitioner was posted at XVlll Squadran Air Force attached to Head Quarters. Central Air Command, Air Force Station, Bamrauli, Allahabad. On the said date i.e. on 21-8-1987, at about 18.30 hours Squadran Leader, A.N. Rai, A.E. (M) reported to A.D.M R, K. Mehra SMSO of HQ Central Air Command, f AF Bamrauli that on the same day at about 12.00 hours while examining his daughter aged about 13 years, the Petitioner mis behaved with her by pressing her thighs all over and the Petitioner asked her to hold his private part and got her under garments taken out and genitals touched. In support of the aforesaid oral complaint, a written complaint was also sent by the Squadran Leader A.N. Rai stating the same facts again as were told by him to the Squadran Leader on the date of the incident i, e. 21-8-87 on 27-8-87, the victim girl, with whom the Petitioner misbehaved. In the manner disclosed above, also lodged a written complaint to A.O.C. Incharge, Bamrauli, Allahabad.
(2.) On the basis of the aforesaid complaint, the Director of Personnel Services for Chief of the Air Staff being satisfied with the genuineness of the complaint, served a show cause notice on the Petitioner dated 23-9-87. In the aforesaid show cause notice it was stated that the Petitioner mis-behaved with the daughter of Squadran Leader A.N. Rai on 21-8-87 in the manner indicated earlier in this judgment. It was further stated that in support of the aforesaid complaint Squadran Leader A N. Rai gave a written complaint on 24-8-87 and on 27-8-87 the victim girl also gave a written complaint to A.O.C. In-C Central Air Command I.A.F. complaining the incident on 21-8-87 and elaborating that after examining her at 12.00 hours in the presence of her father Squadran Leader A.N. Rai, she was advised to undergo some pathological test. Thereafter, while she was waiting to give blood and Urine sample for the test, advised by the Petitioner, the Petitioner again called her for re-examination and misbehaved with her by pulling down her undergarments, pressing her thighs, all over and asking her to press the Petitioner's private organ. The show cause notice further disclosed that on 26-8-87 at about 19.30 hours and 22.00 hours the Petitioner visited the house of f Squadran Leader A.N. Rai and begged pardon of Squadran Leader Rai and said that he had don? sin against his daughter against all medical ethics and for the same purpose the Petitioner again visited the Squadran Leader A N. Rai on 27-8-87. The copy of the complaint filed by the Squadran Leader A.N. Rai copy of the complaint filed by the girl, with whom the Petitioner misbehaved and copy of the statement of Squadran Leader A.N. Rai dated 28-8-87 giving the details of the visit of the Petitioner to Squadran Leader's house on 26-8-87 and 27-8-87 and begging pardon for the incident was enclosed with the show cause notice. The show cause notice also stated that the Chief of the Air Staff after considering the misconduct of the Petitioner, was of the opinion that since the trial by the Court Martial is inexpedient in the circumstances of the case, the retention of the Petitioner in service is un-desirable. The show cause notice was served on the Petitioner in accordance with Rule-16 of the Air Force Rules. The Petitioner replied the aforesaid show cause notice and denied the allegations.
(3.) By order and on behalf of President of India dated 14-2-91, the Petitioner's explanation and the points raised by the Petitioner were considered and were rejected. By the said order the Petitioner was compulsorily retired. While exercising powers conferred under Section-19 of the Air Force Act, read with Rule-16 of the Air Force Rules, the Petitioner has challenged the aforesaid order by means of the present writ petition. Rule-16 of the Air Force Rules is reproduced below : 16. Dismissal or removal of officers for misconduct : (1) An officer may be dismissed or removed from service for misconduct by the Central Government, but before doing so and subject to the provisions of sub-rule (2) he shall be given an opportunity to show cause against such action. (2) Where the dismissal or removal of an officer is proposed on ground of misconduct which has led to his conviction by a criminal Court, or where the Central Government is satisfied that for reasons to be recorded in writing, it is not expedient or rsasonably precticable to do so, it shall not be necessary to give an opportunity to the officer of showing cause against his dismissal or removal. (3) Where an officer has been convicted by a criminal Court and the Central Government, after examining the judgment of the criminal Court in his case and considering the recommendation about him of the Chief of the Air Staff, is of opinion that further retention of such officer in the service is undesirable, that Government may dismiss or remove such officer from the service. (4) In any case not falling under sub-rule (3), when the Chief of the Air Staff, after considering the reports on an officer's misconduct, is of opinion that the trial of the officer by a Court martial is inexpedient or impracticable but the further retention of the officer in the service is undesirable, he shall so inform the officer, and subject to the provisions of sub-rule (5) furnish to the officer all reports adverse to him calling upon him to submit in writing within a reasonable period to be specified, his explanation in defence and any reasons which he may with to put onward against his dismissal or removal. (5) The Chief of the Air Staff may withhold from disclosure any report adverse to an officer or any portion thereof, if in his opinion its disclosure is not in the interests of the security of the State. (6) If so explanation is received from the officer within the specified period or if the explanation received is considered to be not satisfactory or, when so directed by the Central Government, the reports against the officer as well as his explanation, if any, shall be submitted to the Central Government by the Chief of the Air Staff together with his recommendation as to the dismissal or removal of the officer from the service. (7) The Central Government may, after considering the reports against the officer and his defence, if any, and the recommendation of the Chief of the Air Staff, dismiss or remove the officer from service. (8) In this rule and in Rule 17 the Chief of the Air Staff while submit-ting a case to the Central Government may recommend that instead of removing an officer from service, he may be compulsorily retired or that he should be called upon to resign his commission, and the Central Government is passing orders may instead of removing an officer from service, compulsorily retire him or given the officer an option to submit his resignation, and if he refuses to do so, remove him from the service.;