Delinquent Officer Who Skipped Departmental Enquiry Can't Challenge Ex Parte Dismissal: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has upheld the dismissal of a CISF Sub-Inspector, holding that a delinquent employee who deliberately abstains from participating in departmental proceedings cannot subsequently challenge an ex parte punishment order on the ground of violation of the principles of natural justice.

A Division Bench of Justices Anil Kshetrapal and Amit Mahajan observed,

“the Petitioner deliberately absented herself from the enquiry proceedings…despite ample opportunities to present her case, the Petitioner did not turn up to attend the enquiry proceedings much less to controvert the allegations of charge levelled against her. The grounds thus pressed by the Petitioner at this juncture do not bolster her case.”

The Court thus dismissed the writ petition filed by the officer challenging the disciplinary, appellate and revisional orders upholding her removal from service.

Petitioner faced three charges: marrying a person who already had a living spouse in violation of Rule 18(a) of the CISF Rules, remaining absent without leave after deserting the duty station, and falsely claiming to have applied for three years' extraordinary leave. During the departmental enquiry, 16 prosecution witnesses were examined and documentary evidence was produced in support of the charges, leading to her dismissal.

She had sought reinstatement with continuity of service and consequential benefits, contending that the enquiry was conducted ex parte and that the Enquiry Officer, being from the same CISF unit, was biased.

Rejecting the plea, the Court observed that the punishment order passed by the Disciplinary Authority was helmed on cogent factual findings. It said,

“the CISF Rules, 2001, particularly Rule 36(2) does not put an embargo on the appointment of an Enquiry Officer from the same unit. Barring the fact that the Enquiry Officer belonged to the same unit, no other ground has been taken by the Petitioner to paint biasness on the Enquiry Officer.”

As such, finding no infirmity in the decision-making process or the concurrent findings of the disciplinary, appellate and revisional authorities, the Court dismissed the petition.

Appearance: Mr. Krishna Sharma, Mr. Devashish Chauhan & Ms. Jasleen Sandha, Advs. for Petitioner; Mr Vikram Jetly CGSC with Ms Shreya Jetly, Adv. and Mr A C J.P Singh & Mr Yashpal Inspector and SI Rotash CISF

Case title: Ms. Mamta Chaudhary v. Union Of India & Ors.

Case no.: W.P.(C) 7917/2026

Click here to read order