SCA/5544/2007 1/4 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 5544 of 2007 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.S.SHAH AND HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI R.TRIPATHI ========================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge? ========================================= R.M. RAO S/0. BIKAYAL RAM Versus COMMANDANT AND OTHERS ========================================= Appearance : MR GIRISH K PATEL for the Petitioner MS ARCHANA U AMIN for the Respondents ========================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.S.SHAH and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI R.TRIPATHI Date : 31/03/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT (Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.S.SHAH) SCA/5544/2007 2/4 JUDGMENT Having heard Mr.Girish K.Patel, learned advocate for the petitioner and Ms.Archana Amin, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent, it appears to us that this is a fit case where the petitioner should seek redressal of his grievance by filing revision application before the Director General, CISF, New Delhi. We accordingly permit the learned advocate for the petitioner to join Director General, CISF, New Delhi as respondent No.4. Ms.Acrchna Amin, learned Standing Counsel, waives service of notice on behalf of the newly added respondent. 2. What is challenged in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is the order of dismissal from service passed by the Deputy Inspector General of Police, West Zone, CISF, in modification of the order of the disciplinary authority which had only imposed penalty of reduction of pay by one stage. The order of dismissal from service has also been confirmed by the Inspector General, CISF. 3. It appears that the disciplinary proceedings were initiated against a number of constables in relation to theft of certain copper scrap from the container in the Container Yard of the Kandala Port Trust. The disciplinary authority passed order of dismissal/removal from service against only 4 employees and in case of other 10 employees, the disciplinary authority imposed penalty of reduction of pay by one, two or three stages for a period of one year or two years. Thus, it appears that the disciplinary authority had taken SCA/5544/2007 3/4 JUDGMENT into consideration the gravity of lapses on the part of the concerned constables and the order of penalty or reduction of pay by one stage for a period of one year was imposed on the petitioner. There was also another constable P.G.Patil, in whose case also, the order of penalty passed by the disciplinary authority was similar to the one passed against the present petitioner, i.e. reduction of pay by one stage for a period of one year. Similar order was passed by the disciplinary authority against Ex-constable Santosh Singh, i.e. reduction of pay to minimum pay for a period of two years. 4. Our attention is invited to the fact that in case of constable Santosh Singh and in case of constable P.G.Patil also, the DIG, CISF had enhanced the penalty from reduction of pay to that of removal from service or dismissal from service. Constable Santosh Singh had challenged that order before the Inspector General, CISF. The appeal was dismissed, but in revision application, the Director General, CISF set aside the order of removal from service, reinstated constable Santosh Singh and restored the penalty of reduction of pay as imposed by the disciplinary authority. In case of constable P.G.Patil, this Court allowed Special Civil Application No.24530 of 2006 by judgment and order dated 29.01.2007. 5. Having heard the learned advocates for the parties, we are of the view that the grievance made by the petitioner in this petition needs to be examined by the Director General,CISF. We, therefore, dispose of this petition with a direction that if the petitioner prefers SCA/5544/2007 4/4 JUDGMENT revision application before the Director General, CISF within one month from today, the Director General, CISF – respondent No.4 herein will consider and decide the revision application on merits after taking into consideration the orders of the disciplinary authority, the role attributed to the different constables and also the orders passed in cases of constables Santosh Singh and P.G.Patil. 6. In case the decision in the revision application is adverse to the petitioner, the petitioner will be at liberty to move this Court for reviving this petition. 7. The petition is disposed of accordingly in terms of the above directions. (M.S.SHAH, J.) (RAVI R.TRIPATHI, J.) *Shitole