Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
H.C. Ravinder Kumar vs Commissioner Of Police on 8 October, 2013
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH OA No.2441/2012 New Delhi this the 8th day of October, 2013 Honble Mr. Sudhir Kumar, Member (A) Honble Mr. A.K.Bhardwaj, Member (J) H.C. Ravinder Kumar No.640 T, PIS No.28930319 Traffic Circle, Kalkaji New Delhi Applicant (By Advocate Shri Sukhbir Singh) VERSUS 1. Commissioner of Police, Delhi Police Head Quarters, I.T.O., NEW DELHI. 2. Addl. Commissioner of Police, Traffic, Delhi Police Head Quarters, I.T.O., New Delhi. Respondents (By Advocate Shri B.N.P. Pathak) O R D E R Honble Mr. A.K.Bhardwaj, Member (J):
In the show cause notice dated 3.09.2009 (Annexure A-3) issued to the applicant, it was alleged that when checked by ACP/T/SW, the applicant along with ASI Bhagwan (No.2572/T), HC Hashim Beg (No.356/T) and Const. Ram Kishan (No.947/T) were found absent from duty at R.K. Puram Circle at about 7.45 PM. In reply to the said show cause notice, the applicant explained that on the date of check, he was present on duty at the R.K. Puram Circle on Motor Cycle call sign No.RKC-44 at about 7.45 PM and at 8.00PM when the ACP came for check, he was present at the point to regulate the traffic smoothly. He also submitted that at the relevant time, he challaned one Taxi No.DL-1T-5621 under Sections 18.2/177 RRR for yellow line violation at Baba Balak Nath cut, R.T. Ram Marg, New Delhi. He also enclosed a copy of the said challan with his reply. He further explained that at about 8.05 PM, it was learnt through a person that due to heavy rain, one tree had fallen down at about 100-150 mtrs towards Shanti Niketan which caused obstruction in smooth traffic, thus he along with one Constable immediately rushed there and handled the traffic manually upto 9.00 PM. He finally denied the allegation made against him.
2. Having examined the aforementioned reply, the competent authority passed the order dated 19.10.2009 censuring the conduct of the applicant for his lapse/ misconduct mentioned in the show cause notice. The view taken in the said order reads as under:
These pleas of the defaulters are not tenable, because ACP-T/SW had checked the point and during checking ASI Shri Bhagwan No.2572/T, HC Hashim Beg No.3561/T H. Ct. Ravinder No.640/T and Ct. Ram Kishan 947/T were found absent since 7.45 PM onwards from their points RTR Sangam `T point & Baba Balak Nath Marg RTR cut. Hence they were marked absent vide DD No.17 dt. 27.07.09 and they made their arrival vide DD No. 18 dt. 27.07.09 at 9 PM when they come to know about recording of their absence in the roznamcha.
Against the said order, the applicant made a detailed appeal (Annexure A-7). The appeal was rejected in terms of the order dated 11.05.2012. Thus the applicant filed the present OA praying therein:
(a) Set aside the impugned order dated 11.05.2012 passed by the appellate authority in the appeal U/S 23 of D.P. Act and also the order dated 19.10.2009 as well as the Show Cause Notice dated 07.09.2009.
direct the respondent to expunge the entry made in the Character Roll of the applicant and restore the seniority of the applicant in the Rank of Head Constable w.e.f. 31.03.2011 with consequential benefits.
) allow the cost of litigation in favour of the applicant and against the respondent.
3. One of the grounds raised in the OA is that the appeal is rejected by a non-speaking order. The said ground reads as under:
(xiii) That the Addl. Commissioner of Police, the appellant authority, was pleased to reject the appeal filed by the applicant vide impugned order dated 10.05.2012, arbitrarily and illegally and without speaking order as there was no evidence on record that the applicant was allegedly absent at the alleged period of time nor any witness was examined. The copy of the impugned order was supplied to the applicant on 16.05.2012.
4. In the counter reply filed on behalf of respondents, the factual developments in the case including the filing of appeal and rejection thereof are narrated.
5. Mr. B.N.P. Pathak, learned counsel for the respondents produced the record and referred to letter dated 29.07.2009 signed by the ACP, addressed to DCP (TSR) which reads as under:
With reference to WTM No.1505/Jt. CP/T dated 29.07.2009 and endst. No. 5979/DCP/T-SR dated 29.07.2009 on the subject regarding disappearance of staff from duty point on 27.07.2009.
It is submitted that keeping in view of heavy rain pour in the evening on 27.07.2009, all Tia posted in west District were immediately briefed through telephones to remain extra alert and vigilant in their respective area and they will sensitize their staff accordingly. It was further explained to them that under no circumstance their staff would leave their duty point before 22:30 hrs or till the traffic is completely normal in the area. I personally checked all the important intersections and briefed the staff of their duty points. Due to alertness there was no traffic jam calls from West District on that day.
6. From the above quoted letter, it is clear that the traffic staff was to remain present on duty till 22.30 hrs. Though there might be no reason to doubt the report of the ACP, still the justice should not only be done but seems to be done.
7. We find that while rejecting the appeal of the applicant, the appellate authority has not dealt with any of the pleas raised by the applicant in the same. Since the order of the appellate authority is not sustainable in the eyes of law being a non-speaking order, no other plea raised need to be examined. In the circumstances, the order of the appellate authority is quashed and the matter is remitted back to the said authority for fresh disposal of the appeal by way of a speaking order as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.
(A.K.Bhardwaj ) ( Sudhir Kumar ) Member (J) Member (A) /dkm/