KANAILAL BERA versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

Citation: [2007] 10 S.C.R. 612 · Decided: 24-09-2007 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S.B. SINHA · Disposal: Case Partly allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
KANAILAL BERA 
·:--{ 
v. 
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. 
SEPTEMBER 24, 2007 
B 
[S.B. SINHA AND H.S. BEDI, JJ.] 
Service Law: 
~ ..... , 
c 
Central Reserve Police Force Rules-Rule 27--Departmental 
inquiry-Initiation of second inquiry after dismissing the delinquent 
from service having found that charges partially proved against him 
in the first inquiry-Sustainability of-Held: Not sustainable-Once 
a departmental proceeding has been initiated, same must be brought 
D 
to its logical end-Finding is to be arrived at whether delinquent was 
guilty of charges leveled or not-In view of the fact that long time has 
elapsed and that the disciplinary Authority misdirected itself by not 
complying with Rule 2 7, in exercise of discretionary jurisdiction, 
)-· 
delinquent to be reinstated in service-However, since the delinquent 
E 
did not approach High Court against alleged misconduct within 
reasonable time, delinquent denied back wages-Constitution of India, 
1950-Article 142. 
Appellant, a constable in CRPF remained unauthorisedly 
absent and was sentenced to seven days confinement to Civil Lines. 
F Thereafter, disciplinary proceeding was initiated against the 
appellant and he was sentenced to ten days confinement in Civil 
Lines. However, he refused to comply with the same and another 
disciplinary proceeding was initiated against him. Charges levelled 
against him were partially proved and he was dismissed from service 
G but another disciplinary proceeding was directed to be initiated. 
Appellant filed appeal against dismissal order and the same was 
dismissed. Both the Writ Petition as well as the appeal was dismissed 
on the ground oflong delay. Hence the present appeal. 
Partly allowing the appeal, the Court 
H 
612 
KANAILAL BERA v. UNION OF INDIA 
613 
HELD: 1.1 Rule 27 of the Central Reserve Police Force Rules A 
'r 
1955, inter alia, lays down the procedure for conducting a 
departmental inquiry. Once a disciplinary proceeding has been 
initiated, the same must be brought to its logical end meaning 
thereby a finding is required to be arrived at as to whether the 
delinquent officer is guilty of charges levelled against him or not. In B 
a given situation further evidences may be directed to be adduced 
but the same would not mean that despite holding a delinquent officer 
·> , 
to be partially guilty of the charges levelled against him another 
inquiry would be directed to be initiated on the self same charges 
which could not be proved in the first inquiry. It is accepted that the c 
purported order of the disciplinary authority was unsustainable in 
law. [Para 5] [616-D, E, C] 
KR.Deb v. The Collector of Central Excise, Shillong, [1971] 2 
sec 102, referred to. 
D 
1.2. In the meantime, fifteen years have elapsed. Ordinarily, 
--.( 
although, quantum of punishment would not be interfered with but 
keeping in view the fact that the disciplinary authority must be held 
to have misdirected itself by not complying with Rule 27 of the 
Central Reserve Police Force Rules, stricto sensu and having E 
directed a further inquiry after ordering for the dismissal of services 
of the appellant, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case 
which may not be treated to be a precedent, in exercise of 
discretionary jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution of 
~ 
India, the appellant should be directed to be reinstated in service. 
F 
[Paras 8 and 9] [617-E-G] 
+ 
1.3. Back wages cannot be directed to be granted automatically. 
Several factors are required to be taken into consideration therefor. 
The misconduct is alleged to have been committed in the year 1992. 
Appellant, admittedly, did not approach the High Court within a G 
->-
reasonable time. The High Court had refused to exercise its power 
of judicial review having regard to delay and laches on the part of 
. . . the appellant. Having regard to the said fact, interest of justice would 
be subserved if the appellant is denied the back wages for the said 
period. However, appellant should be reinstated in service and be H 
-~ 
614 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2007] 10 S.C.R. 
A given all other consequential benefits. 
[Paras 11, 12 and 13] [618-C-D] 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 4493 of 
2007. 
B 
From the Judgment and final Order dated 9.11.2006 of the High 
Court of Calcutta in F.M.A. No. 594 of2003. 
Bikas Kar Gupta, Bikash Ranjan Neogi, R.K. Gharai and V. 
Sivasubramanian for the Appellant. 
c 
A. Sharan, ASG., B. Sunita Rao and

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.