Khekhomba Wangkhem vs Union Of India

[1] Heard Mr. I. Denning, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. S. Vijayanand Sharma, learned Sr. PCCG appearing for the

respondents.

[2] The present writ petition has been filed praying for quashing and setting aside the impugned enquiry notice dated 20.07.2019 issued by the

CASO/Commandant, CISF Unit ASG, Guwahati for conducting a preliminary enquiry into the allegations made against the present writ petitioner.

The relevant facts of the present case in a nut shell is that the petitioner was transferred and posted to ASG, Imphal as Deputy Commandant/Exe by

an order dated 09.10.2017. After serving for about 1(one) year at the ASG, Imphal, the petitioner was again transferred at ONGC, Nazira by an order

dated 18.10.2018. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner assailed the said new transfer order by filing WP(C) No. 1022 of 2018 before this Court. In the

said writ petition, this Court passed an interim order suspending the operation of the impugned transfer order.

[3] When the respondents in the above mentioned writ petition filed their counter affidavits, it has been stated that on the basis of a confidential report

raising serious allegations against the petitioner, the petitioner had been transferred to facilitate conducting of a preliminary enquiry against him to find

out the veracity of the allegations.

[4] It will be pertinent to mention here that the learned counsel for the respondents placed before this Court the relevant official files under a sealed

cover for perusal of this Court to substantiate their statements. On perusal of the said official file, it is found that a report dated 05.10.2018 was

submitted by the Deputy Inspector General, CISF AP(E & NE) HQrs, Kolkata to the ADG/APS, CISF APS HQrs, New Delhi, raising serious

allegations against the petitioner.

On the basis of the said report dated 05.10.2018 submitted by the DIG, CISF AP(E & NE) HQrs, Kolkata,the petitioner had been transferred from

ASG, Imphal to ONGC, Nazira to facilitate conducting the preliminary enquiry against the petitioner to find out the veracity of such allegations.

[5] As a next step towards conducting the contemplated preliminary enquiry, the ADG/APS CISF directed Shri. L.K. Haokip, Commandant & CASO,

ASG, Guwahati to conduct the preliminary enquiry and submit report by 30.11.2018. Pursuant to the direction of the ADG/APS, CISF, the

AIG/Airport Sector wrote a letter dated 08.11.2018 requesting Shri L.K. Haokip, Commandant & CASO, ASG, Guwahati requesting him to conduct a

preliminary enquiry into the allegations against the petitioner and to submit the report by 30.11.2018 for perusal of the competent authority.

[6] Subsequently, Shri L.K. Haokip, the preliminary enquiry officer, wrote a letter dated 16.11.2018 to the Deputy Commandant & CASO, CISF Unit,

ASG, Imphal Airport, informing the latter about holding of the proposed preliminary enquiry and requesting to ensure the presence of CISF personnel

for examination and for recording their statements. However, the proposed preliminary enquiry was postponed until further order by letter dated

19.11.2018 issued by the aforesaid preliminary enquiry officer.

It has been stated by the respondents in their counter affidavits that the proposed preliminary enquiry was kept on hold since this Court had granted

interim stay on the transfer order of the writ petitioner and as he continue to remain posted as CASO, ASG Imphal and as it was felt that the witness

would find it difficult to depose freely since the petitioner continued to be their supervisory officer.

[7] Considering the gravity of the allegations made against the petitioner, the authorities decided to resume the said preliminary enquiry as the matter

has been pending for more than 10(ten) monthsand such graved allegation cannot be kept suspended indefinitely. Accordingly, in order to ensure a fair

and transparent preliminary enquiry, the authorities, after collecting certain information and necessary where-about of witnesses, the impugned enquiry

notice dated 20.07.2019 was issued by the preliminary enquiry officer notifying about conducting of the preliminary enquiry against the petitioner and

also calling the witnesses, whose names are reflected in the said enquiry notice, to report at the office of the enquiry officer at Guwahati for recording

their statements.

[8] Against the said impugned enquiry notice, the petitioner submitted a representation to the Director General, CISF stating, inter alia, that he was not

given any intimation about the proposed enquiry and that the enquiry is just to intimidate and mentally harassed him. That the initiation of the enquiry is

biased and totally uncalled for in the light of the proceedings pending in this Court and that he had not been given any opportunity to defend himself

against the adverse report, etc.

The petitioner thereafter, filed the present writ petition assailing the said enquiry notice dated 20.07.2018.

[9] Mr. I. Denning, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that there is no adverse report against the petitioner and that the

respondents have initiated the preliminary enquiry against the petitioner just to vindicate the statements made by the respondents in their counter

affidavits filed in connection with WP(C) No. 1022 of 2018, filed by the present writ petitioner challenging his transfer order. The learned counsel

accordingly submitted that the impugned enquiry notice deserves to be quashed and set aside.

[10] It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the Commandant, CISF Unit, ASG, Guwahati is not competent and has no

authority to hold the preliminary enquiry and accordingly on this count also the impugned enquiry notice deserves to be quashed and set aside.

[11] Mr. S. Vijayanand Sharma, learned counsel for the respondents, on the other hand submitted that the contemplated preliminary enquiry is a

process for checking the veracity of the allegations made against the petitioner and if the allegations is found to be true, then to collect evidences in

support of the allegations to enable the authorities to hold a full fledged departmental enquiry. It is submitted that it is a fundamental principle of

administrative law that the disciplinary authority can conduct preliminary enquiry without any encumbrance in public interest and such preliminary

enquiry can be held behind the back of the petitioner and there is no requirement under law that the petitioner should be given a chance to defend

himself. Only when a full fledged departmental enquiry is held, then the authorities has to conduct such enquiry by observing the principle of natural

justice and after hearing all the parties concerned.

[12] After hearing both the counsel appearing for the parties and after examining relevant records, it is found that the Deputy Inspector General,

CISF, AP (E & NE) HQrs, Kolkata submitted a report dated 05.10.2018 to the ADG/APS, CISF raising serious allegations against the petitioner and

on the basis of the said report steps has been taken by the authorities for conducting the preliminary enquiry to find out the veracity of such allegations

made against the petitioner. Accordingly, the ADG/APS, CISF directed Shri L.K. Haokip, the preliminary enquiry officer to conduct a preliminary

enquiry and submits a report and as per directions of the competent authorities, the appointed preliminary enquiry officer issued the impugned enquiry

notice.

In view of the above, this Court find no substance in the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner that there is no report raising allegations against

the petitioner and that the respondents have initiated the preliminary enquiry against the petitioner just to vindicate the statements made by the

authorities in their counter affidavits filed in connection with WP(C) No. 1022 of 2018, which was filed by the petitioner challenging his transfer order.

This Court also find no substance in the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner that the Commandant, CISF Unit ASG, Guwahati is not

competent and has no authority to hold the preliminary enquiry, inasmuch as, the said Commandant had been appointed as the enquiry officer by the

ADG, APS CISF, who is the competent authority,to conduct the preliminary enquiry against the petitioner.

In view of the above, this Court finds no merit in the present writ petition and accordingly, the present writ petition is dismissed, however, without any

costs.

Interim order passed earlier stands vacated.