Manipur High CourtJc-356629W Rajib Kumar Sarkar vs The Union Of India & 3 Ors on 10 September, 2020Author:Kh. Nobin SinghBench:Kh. Nobin SinghIN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR : AT IMPHAL\n\n\n                        WP(C)No. 494 of 2020\n\n\nJC-356629W Rajib Kumar Sarkar                        ... Petitioner\n     -Versus-\nThe Union of India & 3 ors.                          ... RespondentsB E F O R E\n             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KH. NOBIN SINGH\n\n10.09.2020\n\n          Heard Ms.Ayangleima, learned Advocate appearing for the\npetitioner and Mr. S. Suresh, learned ASG for the respondents.[1]       The    validity   and   correctness   of    the   notice   dated\n04.06.2020 issued in respect of the Court of Inquiry to be composed/\ninitiated by the Respondent No.3 against the petitioner's husband is\nunder challenge in this writ petition. Two more prayers have been\nmade in the writ petition-one, for issuing a direction to the\nrespondents No.3 to release the petitioner's husband in terms of the\ntransfer order dated 27.11.2019 issued by the Directorate General of\nAssam Rifles, Shillong transferring the petitioner's husband from the\npresent place of posting to Agartala and two, for issuing a direction\nto the respondents to hand over the case of the petitioner's husband\nto an Independent Agency like CBI or any other authority under the\nMinistry of Home Affairs, Govt. of India other than the Assam Rifles\nfor investigation.[2.1]     According to the petitioner, her husband is presently\nserving as a Subedar (Cipher) and is posted at 18 Assam Rifles atPage 1 of 7Chandel District, Manipur. While the petitioner's husband was being\nposted at 38 Assam Rifles at Teliamura, Tripura some time ago, he\nwas assigned the duty of looking after the sale of CSD items, ration\nitems etc. from the official Canteen for about 1(one) month and while\nhe was discharging his duties, he found some illegalities in selling\nthe CSD items, ration items and Liquor. Under the command of the\nthen Commandant, 38 Assam Rifles, Shri G.V. Raghavan, the\nconcerned staff illegally sold the CSD items and ration to the civilian,\nbecause of which the petitioner's husband made a complaint to the\nChief of the Army, Government of India. The said complaint of the\npetitioner's husband was duly registered at the Grievance Cell and\nthe Staff Court of Inquiry was composed for investigation into the\ncircumstances and after the enquiry being completed, a convening\norder dated 18.06.2018 was issued. Surprisingly, after about a year\nfrom the date of the said convening order being issued, the office of\nthe Director General of Assam Rifles issued a letter dated\n27.11.2019 enclosing therewith a copy of the Court of Inquiry, which\nwas held at 34 Assam Rifles, along with certain documents including\nthe tentative charge-sheet issued against the petitioner's husband.\nBeing   aggrieved    by   the   said   tentative   charge-sheet   dated\n27.11.2019, the petitioner's husband approached this High Court\nchallenging it by way of a writ petition being WP(C) No.27 of 2020\nwherein this Court passed an interim order dated 28.01.2020\nsuspending the disciplinary proceeding initiated against him till the\ndisposal of the writ petition. The respondent No.3 verbally asked the\npetitioner's husband to withdraw the case but when he refused to do\nso, the respondent No.3 started harassing him.Page 2 of 7[2.2]     On the same day i.e. 27.11.2019, the Directorate of\nAssaim Rifles, Shillong issued an order of transfer wherein the\npetitioner's husband was shown to have been transferred to Loc\nAgartala but the petitioner's husband was/ has not been released for\njoining his duty at Agartala. On 19.02.2020, the petitioner's husband\nsubmitted an application for grant of leave of 45 days but the said\nleave was also not granted by the respondents.[2.3]     On 27.04.2020, the petitioner's husband went to the Unit\nHospital for regular Annual Medical Examination (AME) and the Unit\nDoctor, the respondent No.4 herein told the petitioner's husband that\nhis heart was blocked and as such, the petitioner's husband was\nrequired to get himself admitted at the Unit Hospital immediately. To\nlearn it, the petitioner's husband was shocked as he was not having\nany illness. The petitioner's husband suspected the medical reports\nof the blood sample which was taken on 23.04.2020 and ECG being\ncarried out at the Unit Hospital for the reason that the reports of the\ntests were not furnished to him and moreover, there was no\nPathologist, Microbiologist etc. in the Unit Hospital. As the\npetitioner's husband refused to get himself admitted in the Unit\nHospital, the Doctor of the Unit Hospital, the respondent No.4 asked\nhim to submit a self-declaration letter to the effect that in the event of\nany complicacy arose/ occurred in future, the petitioner's husband\nhimself would be solely responsible for it. Having no alternative, the\npetitioner's husband submitted the self-declaration on 27.04.2020\nitself. On the next day i.e. 28.04.2020 after the said self-declaration\nhaving been submitted by the petitioner's husband, a show cause\nnotice was issued him to explain as to why he had refused to admit\nin the Unit Hospital and the reply was to be submitted within 24Page 3 of 7hours from the date of receipt of the said show-cause notice. Before\nthe petitioner's husband could submit his reply, another show-cause\nnotice date 29.04.2020 was issued directing him to explain the\nreason why he did not reply within the time mentioned therein. On\nhis failure to get himself admitted and to give reply to the show\ncause notice, a letter dated 02.05.2020 was issued to the petitioner's\nhusband directing him to hand over all the classified cipher\ndocuments of crypto centre to the next immediate junior and also to\nforward the completion report to the Commandant by the same day\nie., 02-05-2020 without any delay otherwise necessary disciplinary\naction would be initiated against him. It was impossible for the\npetitioner's husband to do that in few hours and according to him, it\nwas done deliberately by the concerned official with ill motive.[2.4]     On 08.05.2020, the petitioner's husband was referred to\nAssam Rifles Multi-speciality Hospital, Mantripukhri for evaluation\nand after a thorough examination, the Multi-speciality Hospital found\nno health issue but based on the report of the Unit Hospital, the\npetitioner's husband was advised to report to the Unit Hospital for\nmonitoring his BP every six hour for 15(fifteen) days with the further\nadvice that he be escorted/ guarded by two guards, as if he were a\npsychiatric patient and accordingly, the petitioner's husband was\nadmitted to the Unit Hospital from 10.05.2020 to 25.05.2020.[2.5]    On 04.06.2020, a notice was issued to him for composing a\nCourt of Inquiry on the ground that the petitioner's husband\nmisbehaved and used threatening language with the unit RMO,\nCaptain Ankita Dhiman, the respondent No.4 herein while he was in\nthe Unit Hospital. By the said notice, the petitioner's husband wasPage 4 of 7directed to report to the Presiding Officer at KLP Modi on or before\n05.06.2020 and that he was informed that an opportunity of being\nheard was also being given to him. A warning dated 08-06-2020 was\nissued to the petitioner's husband stating that since he had failed to\nobey the command, he should report to the Presiding Officer by 09-\n06-2020 failing which a disciplinary action would be initiated against\nhim. On 09.06.2020, although the petitioner's husband was in his\ngood health, he was referred to the Assam Rifles Multi-speciality\nHospital, Maniptripukhri by the respondent No.4 and accordingly, his\nhealth condition was reviewed there and it was certified by it that the\npetitioner's husband did not have any health issue making it clear\nthat the medical report dated 27-04-2020 was false and unreliable.[2.6]      It is learnt by the petitioner's husband from a reliable\nsource that the HQ DGAR (Rec. Branch) had issued message to the\nconcerned officials whereby directing them to release all due out sigs\nand although other officials had been allowed to move from one\nplace to another through the official convoy, the petitioner's husband\nwas and is yet not released till date.[3]        Being aggrieved by the said notice for the composition of\na Court of Inquiry against the petitioner's husband, the instant writ\npetition has been filed by the petitioner questioning it on the inter-alia\ngrounds that all the aforesaid actions were taken by the respondent\nauthorities in order to harass the petitioner's husband for the reason\nthat the said writ petition being WP(C) No. 27 of 2020 was filed by\nhim and that the behaviour of the superior officers harassing their\njuniors in the work place is against the rule of law and\nunconstitutional.Page 5 of 7[4]       The averments made in the writ petition, if found to be true\nand correct, can be said to be serious ones but this Court is not\ninclined to entertain the writ petition for the reason that it was filed\nafter three months from the date of the notice of Court of Inquiry\ndated 04.06.2020 being issued directing the petitioner's husband to\nreport to the Presiding Officer at KLP Modi on or before 05.06.2020.\nFailure on the part of the petitioner's husband to report to the\nPresiding Officer, a warning dated 08-06-2020 was issued directing\nhim to report by 09-06-2020, failing which a disciplinary action would\nbe initiated against him. No material has been place on record by the\npetitioner to show as to what happened, thereafter, pursuant to the\nsaid notice dated 04-06-2020. In the absence of any material to\nknow what happened during the last three months, it may not be\nappropriate for this Court to entertain the writ petition and pass any\norder which might affect or have a bearing on the actions, if already\ntaken, by the respondents pursuant to the said notice dated 04-06-\n2020. But it may be noted that the respondents being the institutional\nauthorities, ought to act fairly and reasonably. Any action taken by\nthe respondents which is found to be unreasonable, arbitrary etc. will\nbe rendered violative ofArticle 14of the Constitution of India. In view\nof the above, this Court is of the view that the end of justice will be\nmet, if the petitioner's husband is granted an opportunity to submit a\nrepresentation on the issue.[5]       The instant writ petition stands, accordingly, disposed of\nwith the direction that the petitioner's husband may submit a detailed\nrepresentation to the Director General of Assam Rifles, Shillong, the\nrespondent No.2 herein within a period of two weeks from today\neither through e-mail/ WhatsApp or by hand or by speed post and inPage 6 of 7the event of such a representation being submitted by the\npetitioner's husband, the Director General of Assam Rifles, Shillong\nshall consider it and dispose of within a month from the date of\nreceipt of the representation by issuing a reasoned and speaking\norder. As the petitioner's husband is not permitted to move out of the\ncamp as alleged in the writ petition, he shall be granted permission\nby the respondent No.3 to meet his advocate or his advocate may be\npermitted to meet him in the camp so that the petitioner's husband\nmay be able to submit his representation, if so advised, in time. If the\npetitioner's husband is aggrieved by such an order to be issued by\nthe respondent No.2 as regards the representation, it is open to him\nto approach any appropriate forum for redressal of his grievances.\nAny penal or coercive action, if not already taken, shall not be taken\nagainst        the       petitioner's   husband   till   the   disposal    of    his\nrepresentation. It is made clear that this order shall not preclude the\nrespondents and in particular, the respondent No.3 from releasing\nthe petitioner's husband to join his duties at the new place of posting\nat Agartala in terms of the transfer order dated 27-11-2010.Copies of this order shall be sent to the learned counsels\nappearing for the parties through their WhatsApp/e-mail.JUDGE\n\nDhakeshori\n\n\nYumkh        Digitally signed\n             by Yumkham\n\nam           Rother\n             Date:\n             2020.09.14\nRother       13:56:52 +05'30'Page 7 of 7