AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The petitioner is aggrieved of order dated 06.03.2014 by which he has been terminated from service.
Briefly stated, the petitioner in the recruitment exercise for constables in BSF, CISF, CRPF etc. was declared successful for appointment as
constable G.D in Central Industrial Security Force. He was directed to report for basic training on 12.01.2013, however, a showÂcause notice was
issued to him on 17.02.2014 on the allegation of securing employment by impersonation. As noticed above, he was terminated from service by an
order dated 06.03.2014. In the counterÂaffidavit, the respondents have taken a plea that without approaching the Inspector General under Rule 26
of the Central Industrial Security Force Rules, 2001, the petitioner has approached this Court. A plea on jurisdiction of this Court to entertain the writ
petition has also been taken by the respondents.
The proceeding in this writ petition has commenced on 22.04.2014. By now, this writ petition has been listed for hearing in this Court on as many
as six occasions; today is the seventh listing of this case. Before that, the matter was placed before the Joint Registrar (Judicial) on 22.04.2014, the
writ petition was filed on 28.03.2014. Moreover, when the plea of alternative remedy has been found substantial by this Court, sending the records
of this Court to the Calcutta High Court would not serve any fruitful purpose. Rule 26 of the Central Industrial Security Force Rules, 2001 provides
that where the appointing authority has terminated the service of a probationer the Inspector General may on his own motion or otherwise reopen the
case and after making such enquiry as he thinks fit may (i) confirm the action taken by the appointing authority, (ii) withdraw the notice, (iii) reinstate
the probationer in service, and (iv) make such other order in the case as he may consider proper. Apparently, wide powers under Rule 26 of the
Central Industrial Security Force Rules, 2001 has been conferred upon the Inspector General. This power is in the nature of an appellate
jurisdiction.
In view of the provisions under Rule 26 of the Central Industrial Security Force Rules, 2001 this writ petition is held not maintainable, however,
the petitioner shall be at liberty to prefer a representation under Rule 26, within a period of six weeks.        Â