IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 18.01.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VINOD K.SHARMA W.P. No.19359 of 2010 and M.P.No.1 of 2010 A.Enose Rajan, Inspector (Ministerial), CISF UNIT, Neyveli Lignite, Corporation, Neyveli, Cuddalore District. .. Petitioner. Vs. 1. The Director General, Central Industrial Security Force, No.13, CGO's Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi – 110 003. 2. The Deputy Inspector General, CISF South Zone, Besant Nagar, Chennai – 600 090. 3. The Group Commandant, CISF Group Head Quarters, NISA Campus, Hakimpet, Hyderabad. 4. The Assistant Commandant, CISF Group Head Quarters, NISA Campus, Hakimpet, Hyderabad. 5. J.Nayak 6. The Commandant CISF Unit, Neyveli Lignite Corporation, Neyveli, Cuddalore District. .. Respondents. Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari, fied Mandamus calling for the records relating to impugned final order No.V- 15014/CISF/Min-07/AER-GHH/ADM-4/2010/2119 dated 22.07.2010 passed by https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ the third respondent and quash the same and to direct the respondents to pay all monitory benefits. For Petitioner : Mr.Mohamed Ibrahim Ali For Mr.A.S.Mujibur Rahman For Respondents : Mr.S.Ravichandran Central Govt. Standing Counsel O R D E R The petitioner, by invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court, has challenged,, the order of punishment, awarded under Rule 34 of The Central Industrial Security Force Rules, 2001. A fine of amount, not exceeding 7 days, has been imposed by way of minor punishment. 2. The petitioner has approached this Court primarily on the ground that procedure as envisaged under Rule 37 for imposing minor penalties, was not followed, thus, the impugned order is not sustainable in law. 3. It is not in dispute that the impugned order is appealable under Rule 46 of the Rules, therefore, the petitioner has alternative statutory remedy. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that limitation of 30 days in filing the appeal has already expired. He wishes to withdraw this petition with liberty to avail available statutory remedy in accordance with law, subject to condonation of delay in filing the statutory appeal. 5. In view of the above submission, the writ petition is ordered to be dismissed as withdrawn. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 6. Keeping in view of the fact that the petitioner has been bona fide prosecuting his remedy, by invoking writ jurisdiction of this Court, the petitioner is, now, permitted to file an appeal within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 7. In case, any such appeal is filed, the respondents are directed to decide it on merit, by treating it to be within limitation. Sd/- Asst.Registrar /True Copy/ Sub.Asst.Registrar https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ ar To 1. The Director General, Central Industrial Security Force (CISF), No.13, CGO's Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi – 110 003. 2. The Deputy Inspector General, CISF South Zone, Besant Nagar, Chennai – 600 090. 3. The Group Commandant, CISF Group Head Quarters, NISA Campus, Hakimpet, Hyderabad. 4. The Assistant Commandant, CISF Group Head Quarters, NISA Campus, Hakimpet, Hyderabad. 5. The Commandant CISF Unit, Neyveli Lignite Corporation, Neyveli, Cuddalore District. + 1 cc to Mr.S. Ravichandrasn, Advocate SR.3409 + 1 cc to Mr.A.S. Mujibur Rahman, Advocate SR.3426 W.P. No. 19359 of 2010 BKY(CO) EU 21.2.11 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/