Sees Ram vs Union Of India on 1 September, 1996
(6) The order of dismissal, as noticed above, has been passed by the Commandant administratively in exercise of the powers under Section 11(2) of the Act. The opinion was formed by the Commandant because of the misconduct of overstaying me leave without sufficient cause. Overstaying leave without sufficient cause is a misconduct for which it was necessary for the respondents to have tried the petitioner under Section 48 of the Act for the offence under Section 19-A of the Act. Such proceedings which could be initiated against him; since absence without leave is an offence for which the petitioner could be charged with the said offence and tried by Security Force Court in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the rules framed thereunder; were not initiated. Even an opinion was not formed that it was not feasible to try the petitioner by Security Force Court. The petitioner's services, thus, could not have been dispensed with on exercise of administrative powers under Section 11(2) of the Act. The case is fully covered by the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in Sees Ram v. Union of India and Others, (CW 1809/ 93 decided on 6.9.1996)
(7) Consequently, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned orders are quashed and set aside directing the respondents to allow the petitioner to join his duty forthwith with all consequential benefits as regards his pay and continuity of service. Arrears of pay etc., if any, will be worked out and paid within a period of eight weeks from today.