Pramath Patnaik, J. - (1.) Since the reliefs sought for in all the writ petitions are identical, with the consent of the respective counsels, all the writ petitions are heard together and are being disposed of by this common order/judgment.
(2.) In the aforesaid writ applications, the petitioners who were continuing as Head Constable, Constable and Assistant Sub Inspector (Shift in charge) have inter alia challenged the impugned orders of punishment passed by the disciplinary authority which have been confirmed by the appellate authority as well as revisional authority and the petitioners have further prayed for direction to the respondents for reinstatement in services with all consequential benefits.
(3.) The factual matrix, as has been delineated in the writ applications, in a nut shell is that the petitioners were employed as Head Constable, Constable and Assistant Sub Inspector (Shift in charge) respectively in the CISF Unit in Bokaro Steel Plant. On 23.06.2007 while they were posted on duty at one of the gates of the factory for preventing entry of unauthorized vehicles through the gate into the factory premises, on the said date, a truck bearing Registration No.WB-39-9954 was found loaded with Scrap material and Copper near Weight Bridge No.5 inside the factory premises. The vehicle was seized by the employees of the CISF. Consequent upon seizure of the truck from factory premises, the petitioners were placed under suspension vide departmental order dated 23.06.2007 in contemplation of departmental proceeding. Thereafter, charge sheet dated 05.07.2007 i.e. memo of charges were served upon the petitioners, calling them to submit their explanation to the charges. The gist of the charge against the petitioners is that while they were deployed on duty at Mansa Singh Gate on 23.06.2007 they failed to detect unauthorized entry of truck bearing Registration No.WB-39-9954 which entered the premises of the plant on 23.06.2007 without any valid document and loaded Scrap/Copper material were found parked near Weight Bridge No.5. The petitioners submitted their reply to the charge sheet by denying and disputing all the charges levelled against them. In the explanations it is mentioned that the alleged unauthorized vehicle in question had loaded the material from the shed No.17 which is about 10 kilometers from Mansa Singh Gate whereas Duggal gate is just about one kilometer from the place of loading. It has further been submitted that Mansa Singh gate is protected by two locks of CISF and two locks by the security after which they are sealed and the same are opened after the keys are obtained from PCR. Mr. V.K Kakkar, Assistant Commandant was appointed as enquiry officer and Kameshwar Khan, Inspector was appointed as presenting officer. During enquiry witnesses were examined by the prosecution as well as defence, however none of the witnesses have deposed the involvement of the petitioners in their examination in-chief and cross examination. On the self same set of charges, a criminal case was set into motion against the petitioners. The enquiry officer submitted its report and the petitioners were given opportunity to submit their reply to the enquiry and petitioners submitted their explanation of the enquiry report, disputing the findings of the enquiry officer and the respondents without considering the reply imposed the punishment of dismissal from services in case of petitioners in W.P.(S) No.3597 of 2009 and W.P.(S) No.4558 of 2008 and compulsory retirement in case of petitioner in W.P.(S) No.4613 of 2008. The appeal and the revision preferred by the petitioners challenging the order passed by the disciplinary authority were dismissed by the appellate as well as the revisional authority, which are impugned in the instant writ applications.;