MANU/CA/0290/2018

IN THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH AT NEW DELHI

OA No. 447/2013

Decided On: 01.08.2018

Appellants: Udaibir Singh Vs. Respondent: Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
Nita Chowdhury

ORDER

Nita Chowdhury, Member (A)

1. This Original Application (OA) has been filed by the applicant claiming the following reliefs:-

"(i) To quash and set aside the show cause notice at Annexure A-1, order of punishment of censure at annexure A-2 and order of appellate authority at annexure A-3 with all consequential benefits including seniority and promotion and pay and allowances.

Or/and

(ii) Any other relief which this Hon'ble court deems fit and proper may also be awarded to the applicant.

2. The facts of the case are that the applicant was issued a show cause notice dated 09.03.2011 on the following allegations:-

"On perusal of dairy of Motor Cycle checking by ACP/Operation, North East District conducted during the intervening night of 06/07.03.2011, it has been revealed that when he called the motor cycles of PS Jafarabad through Control Room/NE district to come at Seelam Pur Chowk at about 01.40 AM, 06 m/cycles of PS Jafrabad reached after a gap of 45 minutes even after giving three successive reminders through C/Room. On checking of these 06 m/cycles, three of them bearing No. DL-1S-N-56651, D1-IS-S-3424 and DL-1S-N-9064 were found not up to mark and following shortcomings were found:-

1. M/Cycle No. DL-1S-N-5651, was found without flasher, WT and weapon.

2. The flasher & Siren of M/Cycle No. DL-1S-N-3424 were not found in working order.

3. The rider of M/Cycle No. DL-1S-N-9064 was not carrying weapon & WT Set. The riders of M/Cycle could not be satisfactorily reply for delay in reaching Seelam Pur Chowk, which is hardly five minutes distance from PS Jafrabad. When all three m/cycle riders were asked for delay in reaching, all of them replied that they do not have WT set with them, hence they could not get the message.

After that on same day in the same meeting held in DCP office complex by the undersigned in evening on 06.03.2011, while SHO/PS Jafrabad was asked about the non availability of WT Sets, flasher, siren & weapon with the m/Cycle of his Police Station, firstly he could not tell the exact number of WT sets available in the police station Jafrabad and all are not in working order. He further replied that these sets have been sent earlier to NPL for rectifying their technical default. After that undersigned had given directions to I/C Control Room to visit the police station Jafrabad alongwith ACP/Seelam Pur to check the status of the sets and I/C control Room submitted his report & narrating therein the following observation:-

1. Only 04 handheld sets (District Net) were found present in Malkhana and all four were in working condition.

2. There are 06 beat net sets (ATS 2500) are in PS Jafrabad, out of which one is defective and not repairable. 05 beat net sets are kept in Almirah in Malikhana and are in working order, which should be distributed.

3. Static set is installed in PS Jafrabad, but this set is switched off permanently and not in use SHO/PS Jafrabad is requested to make arrangement to operative this set and provide room.

4. There is some defect in static DM Net set installed in SHO Office, which has been brought in Radio workshop for necessary repair."

3. The applicant submitted a reply to the said show cause notice on 30.04.2011. However, the disciplinary authority, without considering any of the plea raised in his reply, imposed the penalty of 'censure' on him by passing a non-speaking order dated 07.05.2011, which is also confirmed by the appellate authority vide its order dated 23.10.2012.

4. It is also alleged that the applicant being SHO of PS Jafrabad has been arbitrarily picked up for punishment despite the fact that as per night patrolling report of ACP/Ops Cell N.E. district, there were motorcycles without wireless set, weapon and siren in many P.S. but still he was picked for the punishment of 'censure' and no other SHO of any PS was given any punishment and thus the applicant being subjected to hostile discrimination.

5. The applicant has relied upon a case of G.P. Sewalia Vs. Union of India (OA No. 220/2006) decided on 27.08.2008 whereby it has been held ........