Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Mallena Gurumurthy, was a Constable in the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) at the Neyveli Lignite Corporation (NLC) unit. He was issued a charge memorandum under Rule 36 of the CISF Rules, 2001 for producing a false ST caste certificate (Savarakapu Tribe) issued by the Mandal Revenue Officer (MRO), Palasa, dated 15.03.1990. Investigation revealed that the certificate was not issued by the MRO Palasa, and the Tahsildar reported no presence of the Savarukapu community in Mamidipalli Village. A departmental enquiry was initiated, and notices were sent to the petitioner, but he did not attend. He sought time citing jaundice, and a final notice was given on 03.07.2008, which he received on 11.07.2008. The enquiry was re-fixed, but the petitioner again sought adjournment on medical grounds. The enquiry proceeded ex parte, and the petitioner was dismissed from service on 14.11.2008. His appeal to the Deputy Inspector General was dismissed on 19.02.2011, and his revision to the Inspector General was dismissed on 29.06.2011. The petitioner challenged these orders by way of a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The court heard arguments from both sides. The court noted that the petitioner had been given sufficient opportunities but failed to participate in the enquiry. The court found no merit in the petition and dismissed it, upholding the dismissal order.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Departmental Enquiry - Fake Caste Certificate - Dismissal - Petitioner, a Constable in CISF, was dismissed for producing a false ST caste certificate and failing to participate in the enquiry despite notices - Court held that the petitioner was given sufficient opportunity but chose not to participate, and the dismissal was justified - (Paras 2-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the dismissal of the petitioner from service for producing a false ST caste certificate and failing to participate in the departmental enquiry was justified.
Final Decision
The writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
Law Points
- Departmental enquiry
- fake caste certificate
- non-participation in enquiry
- dismissal from service
- CISF Rules 2001
- Rule 36
Case Details
Dr. Anita Sumanth, Mummineni Sudheer Kumar
Mr.K.Sivakumar (for petitioner), Mr.J.Vasu (Senior Panel Counsel for respondents)
Union of India, Represented by its Secretary to the Government, Department of Home Affairs, New Delhi; The Director General, CISF Head Quarters, New Delhi; The Inspector General, CISF Head Quarters South Sector, Chennai; The Deputy Inspector General, CISF Unit NLC Neyveli; The Senior Commandant, CISF Unit NLC Neyveli
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging dismissal from service for producing a false ST caste certificate.
Remedy Sought
Quashing of the dismissal order and reinstatement with all monetary and service benefits.
Filing Reason
Petitioner was dismissed from service as Constable in CISF for producing a false ST caste certificate and failing to participate in the departmental enquiry.
Previous Decisions
Dismissal order dated 14.11.2008 by the Senior Commandant; appeal dismissed on 19.02.2011 by the Deputy Inspector General; revision dismissed on 29.06.2011 by the Inspector General.
Issues
Whether the dismissal of the petitioner for producing a false caste certificate was justified.
Whether the petitioner was given sufficient opportunity to participate in the departmental enquiry.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that he was not given proper opportunity and was suffering from jaundice.
Respondents argued that the petitioner was given multiple opportunities but failed to attend the enquiry.
Ratio Decidendi
The petitioner was given sufficient opportunity to participate in the departmental enquiry but chose not to attend. The dismissal based on a false caste certificate is justified.
Judgment Excerpts
The challenge is to an order dated 29.06.2011 dismissing the petitioner from service as a Constable.
Subsequent investigation revealed that the caste certificate has not been issued by the MRO Palasa...
The petitioner had been given sufficient opportunity to participate in the enquiry but had failed to do so.
Procedural History
Charge memorandum issued under Rule 36 of CISF Rules, 2001; enquiry initiated; petitioner failed to attend; ex parte dismissal on 14.11.2008; appeal dismissed on 19.02.2011; revision dismissed on 29.06.2011; writ petition filed in 2012; heard and dismissed on 27.01.2026.
Acts & Sections
- Constitution of India: Article 226
- CISF Rules, 2001: Rule 36
