IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.14004 of 2009 P.K.SAHAY, SON OF SRI SATYADEO SAHAY, RESIDENT OF SHIV NIKETAN, D.BLOCK, NALA RAOD, P.O.+P.S. KADAMKUAN, DISTRICT PATNA---PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE SECRETARY, MHA, GOVT. OF INDIA, N.DELHI. 2. THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, GOVT. OF INDIA, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI. 3. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL CISF, CGO COMPLEX, LODI ROAD, NEW DELHI. 4. THE INSPECTOR GENERAL, CISF, EASTERN ZONE, NEW P.P. COLONY, PATNA- 13. 5. THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL, CISF, EASTERN ZONE, NEW P.P. COLONY, PATNA-13. 6. THE SENIOR COMMANDANT, CISF, UNIT, KHSTPP, KAHALGAON, BHAGALPUR ---RESPONDENTS. For the Petitioner : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Giri, Advocate. For the Respondent : Mr. Sudhir Kumar Tiwary, Advocate. ----------- 02. 27.10.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the Union of India. 2. Petitioner who at the relevant time was serving as Inspector in the Central Industrial Security Force is aggrieved by the order dated 30.4.2009, Annexure-1 passed by the Deputy Inspector General, C.I.S.F., Eastern Zone, Headquarters, Patna, whereunder he has been compulsorily retired invoking Rule 56 Sub-Clause(j) of the Fundamental Rules with further direction to pay him salary for three months, the notice period with effect from 30.4.2009. 3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that perusal of the impugned order itself would indicate that the order does not disclose any material to suggest that petitioner was not fit to continue in the service of the force in public interest. It is further submitted that in March, 2009 itself vide movement order No. 1106 dated 6.3.2009 petitioner was found fit for promotion on the post of Assistant Commandant in the executive side but ignoring such fitness he has - 2 - been compulsorily retired under the impugned order. Highlighting the aforesaid aspects as also the fact that the service record of the petitioner does not deserve the treatment, which has been meted out to him under the impugned order, petitioner has represented before the Joint Secretary(Police) Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India under representation dated 14.5.2009, Annexure-2 and it is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that the said representation has not yet been considered and disposed of by the competent authority in the Ministry of Home Affairs. 4. Having heard counsel for the parties, I direct the competent authority in the Ministry of Home Affairs, Union of India to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 14.5.2009, Annexure-2 in the light of the entries made in the service book of the petitioner as also in the light of the contents of the movement order bearing No.1106 dated 6.3.2009 as early as possible, in any case within two months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. 5. This writ application is, accordingly, disposed of. Rajesh/ (V.N.Sinha, J.)