Court dismisses Mamta Chaudhary's plea against her removal, citing sufficient evidence and no breach of natural justice.
In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court has upheld the removal of Mamta Chaudhary, a Sub-Inspector at the CISF Chennai Unit, dismissing her challenge against the disciplinary actions taken for charges of misconduct. The judgment was delivered by a division bench comprising Justices Anil Kshetarpal and Amit Mahajan.
Mamta Chaudhary was dismissed from service following an ex-parte order dated 8th August 2024, which found her guilty of entering into a marriage while her partner was already married, dereliction of duty, and making false claims about extraordinary leave. The charges were initially framed under Rule 36 of the CISF Rules, 2001, following a departmental inquiry where the charges were substantiated.
The High Court's decision to reject Chaudhary's petition was based on the principle that judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution is limited to examining the decision-making process rather than the merits of the decision itself. The court emphasized that it does not serve as an appellate body over the findings of disciplinary authorities.
Chaudhary's counsel argued that the disciplinary proceedings violated principles of natural justice as the inquiry officer was from the same unit, potentially leading to bias. However, the court found no statutory violation in appointing an inquiry officer from the same unit, as the CISF Rules do not prohibit such appointments.
The case against Chaudhary was built on testimonies and documentary evidence, including witness statements and aadhar card details, proving that she entered into a marriage with Yogesh Kumar, who was already married. The inquiry process involved 16 prosecution witnesses and substantial documentary evidence, leading to a conclusion of misconduct on a preponderance of probability.
Chaudhary's appeal and subsequent revision petition against the disciplinary order were also dismissed, leading her to approach the High Court. However, the court noted that Chaudhary failed to participate in the inquiry proceedings and did not utilize the opportunity to cross-examine witnesses or present her defense.
The judgment underscores the limited scope of judicial review in disciplinary matters, reinforcing the autonomy of disciplinary authorities in managing internal conduct and upholding accountability within the armed forces.
The court's decision reaffirms the importance of procedural compliance and the evidential threshold in disciplinary inquiries, setting a precedent for handling similar cases in the future.
Bottom line:-
Disciplinary proceedings and removal from service of CISF personnel upheld - Charges of misconduct, dereliction of duty, and violation of CISF Rules, 2001 found proved in departmental enquiry.
Statutory provision(s):
CISF Rules, 2001, Rule 36; Article 226 of the Constitution of India; CISF Rules, 2001, Rule 18(a)
Mamta Chaudhary v. Union of India, (Delhi)(DB) : Law Finder Doc id # 2927497
