Excelsior Correspondent
Srinagar, May 10: High Court today dismissed the plea of a CRPF personnel challenging his order of dismissal from services due to negligence in performing his duties at Chief Minister’s residence.
The constable in CRPF Om Parkash was awarded a penalty of dismissal from services by the Commandant 4th Bn. CRPF took care of 56 APO on account of slackness in performing the duties.
Fact of the matter is that the superior official, the Guard Commander of the petitioner-Om Prakash has, during his questioning by the Inquiry Officer, admitted that he had lost his senses because of the situation prevailing at the relevant time, but he has also stated that he was not carrying any weapon at the relevant time because it was the petitioner, who was detailed to man sentry post No. 11 at the relevant time. As against this, the petitioner in his own statement made to the Inquiry Officer has admitted that he was fully armed at the relevant time.
“Thus, the conclusion arrived at by the Inquiry Officer in regard to culpability of the petitioner, cannot be interfered with by this Court in exercise of its power of judicial review. There is, thus, no scope for this Court to interfere in the impugned orders passed by the Appellate and the Revisional Authorities”, Justice Sanjay Dhar said.
Court said that the petitioner has been found to be negligent in performing his duties as sentry on a vital location like CM’s residence. If the security personnel posted at the residence of a high constitutional functionary like CM are allowed to go scot free for their remissness, it would amount to compromising the security of the Chief Minister.
“A security personnel, who has no courage to face an armed colleague, who has gone astray, particularly in a place like CM’s residence, has no place in a brave force like CRPF. Such people do not deserve to be part of such a valiant force which has sacrificed hundreds of its jawans and officers while fighting against enemies of the nation”, Court recorded.
The punishment imposed upon the petitioner by the respondent court added, can by no stretch of imagination, be termed as ‘disproportionate’. “…I do not find any merit in this petition. The same is, accordingly, dismissed”, reads the judgment.
Follow our WhatsApp channel