- (1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) The appellant is aggrieved against the order dated 24.02.2010 passed in W.P.(S) No. 3747 of 2003 by which appellant's writ petition, in which he had challenged his dismissal order passed under Section 12(1) of the C.R.P.F. Act, 1949, has been dismissed.
(3.) According to learned counsel for the appellant, charge levelled against the petitioner/appellant was not of serious nature and was not falling in Section 9 of the Act of 1949 and, therefore, was not heinous offence. It is submitted that punishment order has been passed under Section 12(1) which can be passed only upon imprisonment to any person. It is also submitted that the appellant/petitioner was not given full opportunity of hearing nor he has been given second show cause notice before inflicting punishment of dismissal from service. Learned counsel for the appellant relied upon two judgements of the Hon'ble Supreme Court delivered in the case of Bhagat Ram Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Others, 1983 2 SCC 442 wherein it has been held that in a case where principle of natural justice violated, that vitiates the departmental proceeding. It is also held in that case that the punishment must be proportionate to the gravity of the misconduct. Learned counsel also relied upon another judgement delivered in the case of R Indra Saratchandra Vs. State of Tamilnadu and others, 2011 10 SCC 344. With the help of the judgement in this case, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the writ petition is maintainable even in a case where departmental appeal has not been preferred.;