PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J. - (1.)The instant petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dtd. 28/7/2005, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur Bench, Jabalpur in Original Application No.633 of 2004, whereby, the Original Application of the petitioner has been dismissed.
(2.)The brief facts of the case are that when the petitioner was posted at Bhopal as officiating Commanding Officer of 1 M.P.Navel Unit NCC, Bhopal, he was transferred vide order dtd. 5/4/1990 to Changnacherry (Kerala). The petitioner on 5/5/1990 made representation against his transfer to DG NCC, New Delhi. On his representation, DG NCC, vide order dtd. 11/6/1990 changed the place of posting from Changnacherry to Vishakhapatnam (Andhra Pradesh). The petitioner challenged the said order in Original Application No.489/1990 before the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Jabalpur, Bench at Jabalpur and vide order dtd. 3/7/1990 it was directed that in case the petitioner has not been relieved from Bhopal as on that date, he was not to be relieved to join his new place of posting, until the petitioner's designated successor at Bhopal arrives to take charge of his post. Since the petitioner did not hand over the charge to the designated officer Lieutenant Colonel Balwant Singh and subsequent officer Wing Commander A.K. Singh, therefore, he was issued GENFORM dtd. 30/6/1990 and his name was struck off from the strength of 1 M.P. Navel Unit NCC, Bhopal w.e.f. 1/7/1990. He was required to report to his unit by 12/7/1990, but he reported to his new Unit on 25/8/1992. As a result, he remained absent for more than 2 years i.e. from 13/7/1990 to 25/8/1992. A charge-sheet dtd. 29/3/1993 was issued to the petitioner under sub Rule (1) of Rule 40 of the National Cadet Corps Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the "NCC Act of 1948"). Alongwith the charge-sheet, the memorandum of Article of charges were also served upon him. The petitioner submitted his reply on 20/4/1993 denying all the charges. On 25/8/1993, Col Abdul Kader, GP Cdr, NCC Group Headquarters, Kakinada under the command of Deputy DG NCC, NCC Directorate (A.P), Secunderabad was appointed as the Inquiry Officer. The petitioner was given opportunity of hearing during the enquiry. He attended the departmental enquiry only on 27/12/1993 and remained absent on all other dates. On 5/3/1994, the Inquiry Officer closed the enquiry ex-parte and submitted his report to the disciplinary authority holding the petitioner guilty of all three charges. A copy of the report was sent by the disciplinary authority to the petitioner on 27/6/1994. The petitioner submitted his comments on 21/7/1994. The disciplinary authority vide order dtd. 20/6/1995, concurred with the findings of Inquiry Officer and, petitioner's guilt was found to be proved under Sec. 11 of the NCC Act of 1948 and under Rule 38(1)(b) and 38(2) of the National Cadet Corps Rules, 1948. The petitioner thereafter preferred an appeal before the Government of India, Ministry of Defence which was also dismissed vide order dtd. 28/7/2003. The petitioner therefore, challenged both the orders before CAT, Jabalpur and, vide impugned order, the petition filed by the petitioner has been dismissed. Hence, the petitioner is in the instant writ petition.
(3.)Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that during the period of suspension of the petitioner, the subsistence allowance was not paid; examination of the witnesses was not in correct order; essential documents were not supplied; Inquiry Officer has acted as a prosecutor; there was a denial of assistance of the defence counsel. He further submits that the order of the disciplinary authority was based on an enquiry report which is perverse and even the order passed by the appellate authority is passed by the incompetent authority. He places reliance on the decision of the Supreme Court in the matters of Ghanshyam Das Srivastava Vs. State of M.P (1973) 1 SCC 656, State of Maharashtra Vs. Chandrabhan Tale(1983) 3 SCC 387, M.Paul Anthony Vs. Bharat Gold Mines Ltd. (1999) 3 SCC 679, State of Punjab Vs. K.K. Sharma (2002) 9 SCC 474, P L.Mehta Vs. State of Haryana 1999 SCC ONLINE P&H 1630 , State Bank of India Vs. R.K.Jain (1972) 4 SCC 304, Hardwari Lal vs. State of U.P (1999) 8 SCC 582, Chhel Singh Vs. MGB Gramin Bank (2014) 13 SCC 166 and Union of India Vs. Ram Lakhan Sharma(2018) 7 SCC 670