<p>"The experience of life resolves more than the logic of the law. Our experience guides us that the jawans do speak street language while communicating with each other and liberally spice queries with abuses.<br /><br />"Queries with abuses are in the form of words ........ Quizzing a jawan as to where was he going, it is not uncommon to hear him say, '...................', or when a jawan returns, the other saying '............'," a division bench comprising Justice Pradeep Nandrajog and Justice Suresh Kait said.<br /><br />The court in its recent judgement directed the reinstatement of Krishna Pal Singh, who was dismissed from service after he had used "foul" language against his senior in 2002. <br /><br />He was posted in Panipat.<br /><br />Singh approached the court challenging his dismissal order. In his petition, Singh alleged that his senior sub-inspector, R L Pandit, who was the shift in-charge of the CISF Unit <br />IOC, Panipat had triggered a spat and slapped him on Dec 16, 2002.<br /><br />Countering the petitioner's allegation, the department had maintained that it was Singh who had abused and assaulted Pandit following the spat.<br /><br />The bench expressed its anguish over the department for not analysing the circumstances that led Singh and Pandit to get into a spat before reaching at a conclusion to remove Singh from the service.<br /><br />"We find that neither the disciplinary authority, nor the appellate authority nor the revisional authority has analyzed the facts keeping in view the backdrop circumstances and the facts. The sub-inspector had deposed incorrect facts," the bench added.<br /><br />A preliminary enquiry was conducted and Singh was suspended with immediate effect from Dec 17, 2002.<br /><br />The court accepted Singh's argument that he had told the inquiry panel that on day of incident that he was unwell when his duty was over late in the evening.<br /><br />When his reliever failed to show up, he contacted Pandit over the telephone and wanted to know why the reliever had not arrived. Unable to get a satisfactory explanation, Singh left his post and ran into Pandit who had roundly abused him, Singh had said.<br /><br />The bench rejected the inquiry officer's report saying it as "purely surmises and conjectures" and directed that Singh should be reinstated in service immediately and given full wages from March 10.</p>
<p>"The experience of life resolves more than the logic of the law. Our experience guides us that the jawans do speak street language while communicating with each other and liberally spice queries with abuses.<br /><br />"Queries with abuses are in the form of words ........ Quizzing a jawan as to where was he going, it is not uncommon to hear him say, '...................', or when a jawan returns, the other saying '............'," a division bench comprising Justice Pradeep Nandrajog and Justice Suresh Kait said.<br /><br />The court in its recent judgement directed the reinstatement of Krishna Pal Singh, who was dismissed from service after he had used "foul" language against his senior in 2002. <br /><br />He was posted in Panipat.<br /><br />Singh approached the court challenging his dismissal order. In his petition, Singh alleged that his senior sub-inspector, R L Pandit, who was the shift in-charge of the CISF Unit <br />IOC, Panipat had triggered a spat and slapped him on Dec 16, 2002.<br /><br />Countering the petitioner's allegation, the department had maintained that it was Singh who had abused and assaulted Pandit following the spat.<br /><br />The bench expressed its anguish over the department for not analysing the circumstances that led Singh and Pandit to get into a spat before reaching at a conclusion to remove Singh from the service.<br /><br />"We find that neither the disciplinary authority, nor the appellate authority nor the revisional authority has analyzed the facts keeping in view the backdrop circumstances and the facts. The sub-inspector had deposed incorrect facts," the bench added.<br /><br />A preliminary enquiry was conducted and Singh was suspended with immediate effect from Dec 17, 2002.<br /><br />The court accepted Singh's argument that he had told the inquiry panel that on day of incident that he was unwell when his duty was over late in the evening.<br /><br />When his reliever failed to show up, he contacted Pandit over the telephone and wanted to know why the reliever had not arrived. Unable to get a satisfactory explanation, Singh left his post and ran into Pandit who had roundly abused him, Singh had said.<br /><br />The bench rejected the inquiry officer's report saying it as "purely surmises and conjectures" and directed that Singh should be reinstated in service immediately and given full wages from March 10.</p>