IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.14245 of 2010 ASHOK KUMAR SINGH, SON OF SHRI BIRENDRA KUMAR SINGH, VILLAGE AND P.O. GOPALPUR, P.S. NAYAGAWN, DISTRICT SARAN. Versus 1. THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE DIRECTOR GENERAL, CENTRAL INDUSTRIAL SECURITY FORCE(MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS), NEW DELHI. 2. THE INSPECTOR GENERAL, CENTRAL INDUSTRIAL SECURITY FORCE(MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS), EASTERN ZONE/EASTERN SECTOR, HEAD QUARTER, BORING PATLIPUTRA ROAD, PATNA-13(BIHAR). 3. THE DY. INSPECTOR GENERAL, CENTRAL INDUSTRIAL SECURITY FORCE(MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS) HEAVY ENGINEERING CORPORTION, LTD., DHURWA, RANCHI(JHARKHAND). 4. THE COMMANDANT CENTRAL INDUSTRIAL SECURITY FORCE UNIT OF H.E.C.RANCHI, JHARKHAND. For the petitioner : Mr. Madhav Prasad Yadav, advocate. For the Union : M/s Raghib Ahsan, Sr.Adv., Shiv Kumar, CGC. ----------- 02. 03.09.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the Union. 2. Petitioner served as Constable(GD) in the Central Industrial Security Force(hereinafter referred to as the CISF). He has filed this writ application against the order dated 31.12.2007, Annexure-9, whereunder he has been removed from the service of the force as he was found guilty of over stayal for 545 days. Against the order of removal petitioner filed appeal, which was dismissed under order dated 22.2.2008, Annexure-11. Against the removal, appellate order petitioner filed revision before the I.G., CISF, Bihar, Patna, copy whereof is contained in Annexure-12 to this application. 3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that from the order of the Commandant, CISF, Ranchi dated 28.12.2007, Annexure- 8 itself it will appear that petitioner was allowed ten days’ time to file - 2 - his written defence but before he could submit his written defence in compliance of the order dated 28.12.2007, Annexure-8 the removal order was passed by the Commandant dated 31.12.2007, Annexure-9. 4. Having heard counsel for the petitioner and the Union, I dispose of this writ application directing the revisional authority to consider the revision application of the petitioner filed against the removal, appellate order dated 31.12.2007 and 22.2.2008 Annexures-9 and 11 in accordance with law in light of the submission that petitioner was not allowed adequate opportunity in compliance of the order dated 28.12.2007, Annexure-8 to file his written defence and pass appropriate final order as early as possible, in any case within three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order before the revisional authority. Rajesh/ (V.N. Sinha, J.)