IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.9386 of 2006 SANTOSH KUMAR, son of Shri Anil Kumar, resident of village Banbaria, P.S. Hulasganj, District- Jehanabad Versus 1. THE UNION OF INDIA through the Secretary, Ministry of Home, Delhi 2. The Director General of Police., C.R.P.F., Headquarter, New Delhi 3 The Inspector General of Police, B/S, C.R.P.F., Patna. 4. Additional D.I.G.P., G.C., C.R.P.F. Muzaffarpur 5. The Commandant- 116 BN. C.R.P.F. Dhaligaon, BGGN ( Assam) With C.W.J.C. No. 15854 of 2006 Rajesh Kumar, son of Sri Shrawan Singh, resident of Of village Sadikpur, P.O. Damodarpur, Distt. Lakhisarai (Bihar) Versus 1.The Union of India through Addl. D.I.G., Groupe Centre, C.R.P.F. Mokama Ghat, C.R.P.F. Patna. 2. Inspector General of Police, C.R.P.F. Patna. 3. Deputy Inspector General of Police, C.R.P.F Patna. 4. Commandant, 147 B.N. C.R.P.F. SSB Omplex, Preetnagar, Gangyal, Jammu-118010 .......... Respondents. With C.W.J.C.No. 8526 of 2007 Gopal Kumar son of Sri Janardan Singh, resident of Tola- Ibrahimpur (Belbanna), Village- Bihat, P.S. Barauni, Dist. Begusarai ..................................Petitioner Versus . 1. THE UNION OF INDIA through the Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi. 2. The Director General of Police, C.R.P.F., C.G.O. Complex, New Delhi 3. The Inspector General of Police, Bihar Sector, C.R.P.F. Patna 4. Deputy Inspector General of Police, C.R.P.F. Patna. 5. Additional Deputy Inspector General of Police, C.R.P.F. Group Centre, Muzaffarpur 6. Commandant, 4th Bn. C.R.P.F. Group Centre Mokama, Patna. For the petitioners : Mr. Sanjay Kumar ( C.W.J.C.No. 9386/06) Mr. Sadanand Roy and Mr. Krishna Kr. Yadav ( C.W.J.C. No. 8526 ) Mr. Rajeev Ranjan Prasad (C.W.J.C. 15854 of 2006 ) Advocates For the Union of India :- Mr. Prashant Kashyap, C.G.C. C.W.J.C.No.9386/06) Mr. S.N. Pathak, S.C.C.G. ( C.W.J.C. No. 15854 of 2006) Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocate - 2 - 17-2-2009 Heard learned counsels for the petitioners in all these three writ petitions and learned counsel appearing for the Union of India and other concerned officials. All the petitioners were selected as Constables in the Central Reserve Force ( C.R.P.F.) pursuant to an advertisement dated 13-8-2002. On appointment in the year 2003 they joined their services in their respective Battalion assigned to them. On account of alleged bungling in the recruitment process an investigation was undertaken by the Central Bureau of Investigation ( C.B.I. ). During the pendency of the investigation some of the petitioners were directed to go back to their home while some continued to work. It was understood that if the investigation would end in their favour, then those whowere relieved for home will be taken back. It is the case of the petitioners that without any notice to them and without holding any enquiry to their knowledge by the impugned orders, in the first case dated 7th July, 2006 and in the other two cases dated 23r. February, 2006 a decision was taken to remove them from service purportedly on the basis of report of the C.B.I. In some cases the order of removal so communicated has also been challenged. On behalf of petitioners it has been submitted that in identical situation several writ petitions have been allowed by this Court on the ground that C.B.I. did not find any case against the constables appointed or against the petitioners - 3 - and also on the ground that no enquiry was held after notice to the petitioners. After noticing judgment and orders of this Court dated 27-2-2006 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 14711 of 2004 ( Pradeep Kumar Mishra Vrs. The Union of India and others) and C.W.J.C. No. 927 of 2005 (Awadhesh Kumar Singh Vrs. The Union of India and others), three other writ petitions bearing C.W.J.C.No. 9237 of 2006 ( Abhay Kumar Singh Vrs. The Union of India and others), C.W.J. C. No. 16319 of 2006 ( Sanjay Kumar Singh Vrs. The Union of India and others) and C.W.J.C. No. 2229 of 2007 ( Amit Kumar Gupta Vrs. The Union of India) were allowed by judgment and order of this Court dated 5-2-2009. It was also noticed that one L.P.A. bearing No. 769 of 2008 was dismissed by the Division Bench on 30-9-2008 passed in the case of Pradeep Kumar Mishra and others. It appears that some other similar writ petitions have also been allowed after perusing the judgment and order dated 5-2-2009 passed by this Court as indicated above and after considering the submissions advanced on behalf of similarly situated petitioners and on behalf of the Union of India, this Court finds that admittedly no notice was ever given to the petitioners in any enquiry. Hence, following the earlier judgment and order noticed above, these three writ petitions are also allowed and the impugned orders of removal from service are quashed. In some of the cases the appellate order and revisional order have also been challenged. Those orders shall also stand quashed. The authorities - 4 - Naresh of the C..R.P.F. are directed to accept the joining of the petitioners in the concerned Battalions and pay the entire arrears of salary till the date of joining and to pay them current salary thereafter. It is made clear that if the authorities of the C.R.P.F. have materials with them in the form of enquiry report of the C.B.I. or of any other enquiry to support their stand against the petitioners then they may act in accordance with law after permitting petitioners to join their services. This observation is in accordance with a similar observation made by this Court in judgment and order dated 5-2- 2009 passed in C.W.J.C.No. 9237 of 2006 and other analogous cases already noticed earlier. The writ petitions are allowed. ( Shiva Kirti Singh,J) - 5 - - 6 - Naresh - 7 -