UNION OF INDIA Vs. BISHAMBER DAS
LAWS(SC)-2009-5-188
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: CALCUTTA)
Decided on
May 26,2009
UNION OF INDIA
Appellant
VERSUS
BISHAMBER DAS DOGRA
Respondents
Referred Judgements :-
STATE OF U.P. V. HARENDRA ARORA AND ANR. [REFERRED TO]CHAIRMAN BOARD OF MINING EXAMINATION AND CHIEF INSPECTOR OF MINES VS. RAMJEE [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. MOHAMMAD RAMZAN KHAN [REFERRED TO]
MANAGING DIRECTOR ECIL HYDERABAD VS. B KARUNAKAR [REFERRED TO]
UMRAO SINGH CHOUDHARY VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
S K SINGH VS. CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
SYNDICATE BANK VS. VENKATESH GURURAO KURATI [REFERRED TO]
Cited Judgements :-
RASHPAL SINGH VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(CAL)-2020-7-18] [REFERRED TO]RAJESWAR RABHA VS. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. [LAWS(CAL)-2018-2-171] [REFERRED TO]
SMT. ALOKA BHATTACHARJEE VS. NORTH BENGAL STATE TRANSPORT CORPORATION & ORS. [LAWS(CAL)-2016-11-7] [REFERRED TO]
DILIP MUKHERJEE VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [LAWS(CAL)-2012-4-67] [REFERRED TO]
INDIAN COFFEE BOARD VS. PRESIDING OFFICER LABOUR COURT NO X [LAWS(DLH)-2010-4-13] [REFERRED TO]
BHUPINDER SINGH VS. BANK OF BARODA & ORS [LAWS(DLH)-2018-4-419] [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS VS. RAM SURAT PANDEY AND OTHERS [LAWS(ALL)-2013-8-229] [REFERRED]
Ravinder S. Jinta VS. H.P. State Civil Supplies Corporation [LAWS(HPH)-2010-11-152] [REFERRED TO]
NANI GRAYU VS. STATE OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH [LAWS(GAU)-2010-12-31] [REFERRED TO]
BHUPENDER SINGH VS. GENERAL MANAGER (HRM) & DISCIPLINARY [LAWS(DLH)-2019-4-24] [REFERRED TO]
RAJESH KUMAR VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-2012-12-161] [REFERRED TO]
PARVESH KUMAR VS. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-2013-7-301] [REFERRED TO]
T NARAYANAN VS. OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR HIGH COURT MADRAS AS THE LIQUIDATOR OF SRI VISALAKSHI MILLS PRIVATE LIMITED [LAWS(MAD)-2011-10-53] [REFERRED TO]
RUDRAPAL SINGH CHANDEL VS. STATE OF M P & OTHERS [LAWS(MPH)-2017-5-119] [REFERRED TO]
G. RAJA VS. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE [LAWS(MAD)-2022-11-162] [REFERRED TO]
CHANDRA PAL SINGH VS. STATE PUBLIC SERVICE TRIBUNAL [LAWS(ALL)-2017-4-226] [REFERRED TO]
RAMAKANT MIHIR VS. U.O.I. THRU. SECY. FINANCE MINISTRY N. DELHI [LAWS(ALL)-2023-4-24] [REFERRED TO]
JIBAN KUMAR SARKAR VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(CAL)-2010-10-55] [REFERRED TO]
SANTI SUDHA LAYEK VS. SOUTH BENGAL STATE TRANSPORT CORPORATION & ORS. [LAWS(CAL)-2016-9-49] [REFERRED TO]
MD MOINUDDIN VS. ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENRAL OF POLICE ADMINISTRATION [LAWS(APH)-2010-8-98] [REFERRED TO]
M.V. SUBBAIAH VS. DEPOT MANAGER, APSRTC BUS DEPOT, BADVEL KADAPA [LAWS(APH)-2017-7-21] [REFERRED TO]
PARMAR KANCHANBEN KANTIBHAI VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2019-12-328] [REFERRED TO]
K.S. KARDAM VS. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. [LAWS(DLH)-2016-11-106] [REFERRED TO]
MANOJ KUMAR RAY VS. STATE OF ASSAM [LAWS(GAU)-2019-6-39] [REFERRED TO]
RAJEEV KUMAR VS. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AND ORS. [LAWS(HPH)-2011-4-285] [REFERRED TO]
AJAY VS. STATE OF HARYANA [LAWS(P&H)-2020-8-48] [REFERRED TO]
MANAGEMENT OF PANNIMEDU ESTATE VS. PRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURT, COIMBATORE AND ORS. [LAWS(MAD)-2019-8-537] [REFERRED TO]
NANKAI LAL VS. STATE OF U P AND OTHERS [LAWS(ALL)-2013-5-474] [REFERRED]
SKYPAK SERVICE SPECIALISTS. LTD. MUMBAI VS. ATUL DEWOO PARAB [LAWS(BOM)-2014-5-128] [REFERRED TO]
MANAGEMENT OF M/S. DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION VS. AMBIKA RAM [LAWS(DLH)-2017-4-29] [REFERRED TO]
ARNAB BHATTACHARJEE VS. BENGAL CHEMICALS & PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. [LAWS(CAL)-2022-5-58] [REFERRED TO]
BIRENDER SINGH & ORS VS. DIR GENERAL, RLY PROTECTION SPL FORCE [LAWS(DLH)-2010-2-546] [REFERRED]
NIMA DORJEE VS. STATE OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH & ORS. [LAWS(GAU)-2013-5-92] [REFERRED TO]
CANARA BANK VS. UMAPATHY [LAWS(KAR)-2017-6-71] [REFERRED TO]
NABIN MOHAN VS. STATE OF ASSAM [LAWS(GAU)-2013-10-7] [REFERRED TO]
GOUTAM KUMAR DAS VS. STATE OF W B & ORS [LAWS(CAL)-2018-2-202] [REFERRED TO]
UNIVERSITY OF JODHPUR VS. GOPAL KRISHAN LOHRA [LAWS(RAJ)-2010-5-49] [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. MEERA BAI & ORS [LAWS(MPH)-2018-4-76] [REFERRED TO]
DEVI SHANKAR TIWARI VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(ALL)-2012-2-174] [REFERRED TO]
ONKAR NATH YADAV VS. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA AND 3 OTHERS [LAWS(ALL)-2018-4-176] [REFERRED TO]
MAHENDRA NATH VERMA VS. U.P. STATE PUBLIC SERVICES TRIBUNAL INDIRA BHAWAN LKO. [LAWS(ALL)-2018-9-152] [REFERRED TO]
RINKI DEVI VS. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND [LAWS(JHAR)-2019-8-17] [REFERRED TO]
HARI SINGH GOUR VISHWAVIDYALAYA VS. MANNU LAL RAJAK [LAWS(MPH)-2014-8-152] [REFERRED TO]
CHEZUM LEPCHA VS. STATE OF SIKKIM [LAWS(SIK)-2015-10-6] [REFERRED TO]
SAVINDRA PRASAD SINGH SON OF SRI JAGESHWAR SINGH VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2010-4-714] [REFERRED TO]
RAMESHWAR DAYAL VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2022-1-280] [REFERRED TO]
C RAMESH VS. HINDUSTAN AERONAUTICS LIMITED [LAWS(KAR)-2021-2-77] [REFERRED TO]
D THIRUGNANAM VS. DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE [LAWS(MAD)-2011-2-64] [REFERRED TO]
STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. MOHAMMAD BADRUDDIN [LAWS(SC)-2019-7-58] [REFERRED TO]
SURINDER SINGH VS. GENERAL MANAGER, PERSONNEL AND ADMINISTRATION, ESCORTS MAHLE LTD. [LAWS(P&H)-2020-3-207] [REFERRED TO]
MITHILESH KUMAR SAH VS. STATE OF JHARKHAND [LAWS(JHAR)-2017-6-67] [REFERRED TO]
R GANGADHARAN VS. REGIONAL JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO OPERATIVE SOCIETIES DINDIGUL [LAWS(MAD)-2010-12-125] [REFERRED TO]
RAJASTHAN STATE ROAD CORPORATION VS. SURESH AGARWAL [LAWS(RAJ)-2019-11-76] [REFERRED TO]
DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION VS. NAND KISHORE [LAWS(DLH)-2012-4-161] [REFERRED TO]
BARUN CHATTERJEE VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [LAWS(CAL)-2013-8-48] [REFERRED TO]
PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH VS. ARMY COLLEGE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES THROUGH ITS DEAN AND ORS [LAWS(DLH)-2017-1-15] [REFERRED TO]
PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH VS. ARMY COLLEGE OF MEDICAL SCIENCE & ORS [LAWS(DLH)-2018-7-22] [REFERRED TO]
SUNIL SHARMA VS. REGISTRAR HIGH COURT OF M.P [LAWS(CHH)-2019-11-158] [REFERRED TO]
NANI GRAYU VS. STATE OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH [LAWS(GAU)-2010-12-39] [REFERRED TO]
BODOLAND TERRITORIAL COUNCIL REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY BTC KOKRAJHAR ASSAM VS. KRISHNA HALOI S/O HARKANTA HALOI [LAWS(GAU)-2012-1-65] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF J&K VS. AFTAF AHMAD KHAN [LAWS(J&K)-2019-7-80] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT AND ANR VS. JORUBHA GUMANSINH JADEJA [LAWS(GJH)-2011-2-242] [REFERRED TO]
Anil Kumar Pandey VS. State of Jharkhand [LAWS(JHAR)-2013-8-50] [REFERRED TO]
D.T.C VS. KRISHNA BAHAL [LAWS(DLH)-2020-1-70] [REFERRED TO]
ANIL KUMAR PANDEY VS. STATE OF JHARKHAND [LAWS(JHAR)-2013-10-61] [REFERRED TO]
Manoj Kumar Sinha VS. State of Jharkhand [LAWS(JHAR)-2013-3-140] [REFERRED TO]
Barmeshwar Nath Singh Yadav VS. State of Jharkhand [LAWS(JHAR)-2013-4-168] [REFERRED TO]
DHANANJAY KUMAR SHUKLA VS. STATE OF JHARKHAND THROUGH DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE [LAWS(JHAR)-2013-9-4] [REFERRED TO]
ABHIJIT ROY VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [LAWS(CAL)-2021-11-25] [REFERRED TO]
GOVINDARAJALU KRISHNARAJ VS. UNION OF INDIA & ORS [LAWS(CAL)-2018-5-84] [REFERRED TO]
S MD GHOUSE VS. CHAIRMAN-CUM-PRESIDING OFFICER, INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, ANANTAPUR [LAWS(APH)-2014-10-125] [REFERRED TO]
RANJIT KUMAR JHA VS. THE UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(PAT)-2018-3-32] [REFERRED TO]
GIRIJESH KUMAR VS. STATE OF JHARKHAND. [LAWS(JHAR)-2017-3-31] [REFERRED TO]
CENTRAL INDUSTRIAL SECURITY FORCE & ORS. VS. ABRAR ALI [LAWS(SC)-2016-12-29] [REFERRED TO]
CHAIRMAN, RAJASTHAN STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION VS. SURESH AGARWAL [LAWS(RAJ)-2019-11-93] [REFERRED TO]
DHANPATI BARIK, S/O HARI BARIK VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(CHH)-2017-10-35] [REFERRED TO]
KUSUM ROY VS. CALCUTTA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION [LAWS(CAL)-2015-6-22] [REFERRED TO]
DEBASIS SUTRADHAR VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [LAWS(CAL)-2013-3-67] [REFERRED TO]
R K S GAUTAM VS. STATE OF M P [LAWS(MPH)-2011-7-99] [REFERRED TO]
K.K. REMADEVI VS. UNION BANK OF INDIA AND ORS. [LAWS(KER)-2015-3-264] [REFERRED TO]
K.K. REMADEVI VS. UNION BANK OF INDIA AND ORS. [LAWS(KER)-2015-3-264] [REFERRED TO]
KUMUD CHOUDHURY VS. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS. [LAWS(GAU)-2018-4-113] [REFERRED TO]
GIRIJESH KUMAR SON OF LATE RANJEET SINHA VS. STATE OF JHARKHAND [LAWS(JHAR)-2017-7-204] [REFERRED TO]
BARMESHWAR NATH SINGH YADAV VS. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND AND ORS. [LAWS(JHAR)-2015-1-96] [REFERRED TO]
MOHD YUNUS KHAN VS. STATE OF UP [LAWS(SC)-2010-9-104] [REFERRED TO]
GAUTAM DHAR VS. STATE BANK OF INDIA [LAWS(MEGH)-2019-6-30] [REFERRED TO]
KERALA CO-OPERATIVE MILK MARKETING FEDERATION LTD VS. K T MATHEW\ GENERAL MANAGER [LAWS(KER)-2018-7-605] [REFERRED TO]
RAJASTHAN STATE ROAD CORPORATION VS. SURESH AGARWAL [LAWS(RAJ)-2019-11-27] [REFERRED TO]
IDEAL MINERALS VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(MPH)-2013-8-150] [REFERRED TO]
JUDGEMENT
-
(1.)This Appeal has been filed against the Judgment and Order of the Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court dated 31st January, 2002 in FMAT No. 1370 of 1992 by which it affirmed the judgment and order dated 16th July, 1991 of the learned Single Judge passed in Civil Order No. 3885 W of 1987 setting aside the order of punishment of removal awarded by the Disciplinary Authority to the respondent employee.
(2.)The facts and circumstances giving rise to this appeal are that respondent joined the service as Security guard in Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) in August, 1980. He remained absent from duty without seeking permission or leave, thus, vide order dated 12th August, 1984, he was awarded the entry of censure for the same. Respondent was again punished for remaining absent from duty for three days vide Order dated 22 nd July, 1985 withholding one annual increment for two years. The respondent again absented himself from duty from 31st August, 1985 to 8th September, 1985 i.e. for six days for which vide Order dated 5th September, 1985, he was imposed the punishment of withholding of one annual increment for three years. The respondent again deserted the LINE for the period from 6.3.1986 to 16.3.1986 i.e. 10 days for which he was issued a Show Cause Notice under Rule 34 of CISF Rules on 22/24.3.1986. The said notice could not be served upon him as the respondent again deserted the LINE for a period of 50 days, from 21.3.1986 to 10.5.1986 and joined the service on 11th May, 1986. Therefore, he could be served the show- cause notice dated 22/24.3.1986 on 15th May, 1986. The respondent submitted his reply to the show cause notice. However, as it was not found satisfactory, a regular departmental enquiry was initiated against him. During the pendency of the enquiry, the respondent again deserted the LINE for 11 days from 6.6.1986 to 16.6.1986. The Enquiry Officer concluded the enquiry and submitted the report which was accepted by the Disciplinary Authority who vide order dated 17.6.1986 imposed the punishment of removal from service. While passing the punishment Order, the Disciplinary authority also took into consideration the past conduct of the respondent.
(3.)Being aggrieved, the respondent preferred the Statutory Appeal which was dismissed by the Appellate Authority vide order dated 19.10.1986 observing that the respondent had not completed six years in service but had deserted the LINE five times. Thus no lenient view was permissible.
(2.)The facts and circumstances giving rise to this appeal are that respondent joined the service as Security guard in Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) in August, 1980. He remained absent from duty without seeking permission or leave, thus, vide order dated 12th August, 1984, he was awarded the entry of censure for the same. Respondent was again punished for remaining absent from duty for three days vide Order dated 22 nd July, 1985 withholding one annual increment for two years. The respondent again absented himself from duty from 31st August, 1985 to 8th September, 1985 i.e. for six days for which vide Order dated 5th September, 1985, he was imposed the punishment of withholding of one annual increment for three years. The respondent again deserted the LINE for the period from 6.3.1986 to 16.3.1986 i.e. 10 days for which he was issued a Show Cause Notice under Rule 34 of CISF Rules on 22/24.3.1986. The said notice could not be served upon him as the respondent again deserted the LINE for a period of 50 days, from 21.3.1986 to 10.5.1986 and joined the service on 11th May, 1986. Therefore, he could be served the show- cause notice dated 22/24.3.1986 on 15th May, 1986. The respondent submitted his reply to the show cause notice. However, as it was not found satisfactory, a regular departmental enquiry was initiated against him. During the pendency of the enquiry, the respondent again deserted the LINE for 11 days from 6.6.1986 to 16.6.1986. The Enquiry Officer concluded the enquiry and submitted the report which was accepted by the Disciplinary Authority who vide order dated 17.6.1986 imposed the punishment of removal from service. While passing the punishment Order, the Disciplinary authority also took into consideration the past conduct of the respondent.
(3.)Being aggrieved, the respondent preferred the Statutory Appeal which was dismissed by the Appellate Authority vide order dated 19.10.1986 observing that the respondent had not completed six years in service but had deserted the LINE five times. Thus no lenient view was permissible.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.