Syed Jabir Ahamed v. Central Industrial Security Force

Delhi High Court · 05 Dec 2022 · 2022:DHC:5343-DB
Suresh Kumar Kait; Neena Bansal Krishna
W.P.(C) 16646/2022
2022:DHC:5343-DB
administrative petition_dismissed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court held that dismissal disqualifying an employee from future government employment does not bar private sector employment unless explicitly stated.

Full Text
Translation output
Neutral Citation Number : 2022/DHC/005343
W.P.(C) 16646/2022
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: December 5, 2022
W.P.(C) 16646/2022 & CM APPL. 52439-52440/2022
SYED JABIR AHAMED ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Abhishek Singh, Advocate
VERSUS
CENTRAL INDUSTRIAL SECURITY FORCE ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Avnish Singh, SCGC with Mr. Kapildev Yadav and Mr. Aditya Vikram Dembla, Advocates
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
JUDGMENT
(oral)

1. Vide the present petition, the petitioner is seeking quashing of order letter No.15014/12th R.B./Syed Jabir Ahamed/ANU/36/2020-5764 dated 21.10.2020 passed by Sr. Commandant, CISF, 12th R.B., Behror, Rajasthan (Disciplinary Authority); directions to the respondent Nos.[1] to 3 to reinstate the petitioner in the job along with payment of arrears and back wages; quashing of the permanent order of disqualification for future employment under the Government passed by Sr. Commandant, CISF.

2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that vide order dated 21.10.2020 while dismissing the petitioner from service, it is mentioned in the said order that dismissal from service shall ordinarily be a disqualification for future employment of the petitioner under the 15:02 Neutral Citation Number: 2022/DHC/005343 W.P.(C) 16646/2022 Government with immediate effect.

3. The grievance of the petitioner is that the said observation in the impugned order for future employment of the petitioner is interfering in getting employment in the private establishment.

4. On perusal of the impugned order dated 21.10.2020, we find that in the said order it is clearly mentioned that the dismissal of the petitioner shall be a disqualification for future employment under the Government, however, nowhere it is mentioned that the petitioner is disqualified from getting the employment in private establishment.

5. In view of above, it is made clear that since there is no such embargo on the petitioner vide the impugned order dated 21.10.2021 disqualifying him from getting future employment in private establishment, the petitioner is at liberty to take employment in the private establishment.

6. Accordingly, the present petition and the pending applications stand disposed of.

(SURESH KUMAR KAIT) JUDGE (NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA)

JUDGE DECEMBER 5, 2022 15:02