Rule 161 Of RPF Rules Which Dispenses Departmental Enquiry Is Exception, Sufficient Reasons Must Be Recorded To Invoke It: Gauhati High Court
Case: Aayush Tomar v. The Union of India & 4 Ors.
Coram: Justice Suman Shyam
Case No.: WP(C)/8143/2022
Court Observation: “The petitioner is facing trial in a criminal proceeding arising out of an FIR lodged by the authorities but he is yet to be convicted. It may so happened that eventually, the charge framed against the petitioner may be established in the criminal court. However, since there are allegations brought against the petitioner based on materials collected against him, principles of fairness and natural justice demanded that atleast one opportunity was afforded to the petitioner to explain his conduct, which was apparently not given to him in this case.”
“neither the impugned order dated 24-03-2020 passed by the appellate authority nor the orders passed by the revision authority records proper reason as to why, it was not reasonably practicable to hold an enquiry in the matter. There is also nothing on record to indicate as to why, even a preliminary show-cause notice could not have been served upon the writ petitioner, atleast to give him one opportunity to put his version on the record.”
“Rule 161 is an exception to the procedure laid down in Rule 153 and can be invoked only when there are sufficient and adequate reasons recorded in writing, to show that it is not reasonably practicable to hold an enquiry. The reasons so recorded must not only be proper but also relevant for the purpose of arriving at a conclusion that it is not reasonably practicable to hold an enquiry against the member of the force.”
“Invoking Rule 161, without there being proper reason for doing so, would not only be in violation of Rules 132, 148 and 153 of the Rules of 1987 but also in violation of the principles of natural justice.”
“Therefore, this Court is of the unhesitant opinion that the impugned orders have been issued not only in utter violation of the principles of natural justice but also in violation of the procedure laid down in the Rules of 1987.” “The respondents may, thereafter, proceed against him, in accordance with law, if so advised, after giving the petitioner an opportunity to show cause. In doing so, it will be open for the authorities to place the petitioner under suspension, if deemed necessary.”
Previous Posts
Hindu Succession Act Will Not Come In Way Of Inheritance By Tribal Women: Madras High Court
Keywords
Rule 161 Of RPF Rules Which Dispenses Departmental
