Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010238942017 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/4308/2017 POLASH JYOTI BORA S/O. GUNARAM BORA, VILL. and P.O. BOKOLAI, P.S. GOLAGHAT, DIST. GOLAGHAT, ASSAM, PIN-785625. VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA and 6 ORS. REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI-110001. 2:THE INSPECTOR GENERAL JAMMU SECTOR CRPF JAMMU-181123. 3:THE DY. INSPECTOR GENERAL CRPF JAMMU RANGE CRPF JAMMU-181123. 4:THE COMMANDANT 126TH BATTALION CRPF BIDDA REASI JAMMU and KASHMIR PIN-182311. 5:THE COMPANY COMMANDER Page No.# 2/4 F 126TH CRPF INSPECTORGD KAKARAM MOHOR DIST. REASI JAMMU and KASHMIR PIN-180001. 6:THE ENQUIRY OFFICER SRI UDAY PAUL SINGH BAGHEL ASSTT. COMMANDANT 126TH BATTALION CRPF BIDDA REASI JAMMU and KASHMIR PIN-182311. 7:THE DY. INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE GROUP CENTRE CRPF KHATKHATI P.O. GAUTAM BASTI DIST. KARBI ANGLONG ASSAM PIN-782480 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.S RAHMAN, MR.SK MUKTAR Advocate for the Respondent : MR.Y DOLOIR- 1-7, ASSTT.S.G.I.,SR. CGC Page No.# 3/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR ORDER Date : 31.03.2026 Heard Mr. S. K. Muktar, learned counsel, appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S. Z. Rahman, learned counsel, appearing on behalf of Mr. Y. Doloi, learned C.G.C, for the respondents. 2. The petitioner in the present writ petition has presented a challenge to an order dated 14.01.2017, by which the petitioner was imposed with a penalty of removal from service after a Departmental proceedings was so instituted against him. The petitioner has also assailed the order dated June, 2017, passed by the Appellate authority rejecting the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order of penalty as imposed upon him. 3. Mr. S. K. Muktar, after having attempted to argue the matter at some length, and during the deliberations, it having come to the forefront that no irregularity was committed in the conduct of the proceedings against the petitioner and due opportunity to defend the charges was given to the petitioner. Further, no materials having also been seen to have been adduced before the Enquiry Officer, with regard to the pleas, thereafter, taken by the petitioner, Mr. Muktar, has submitted that the order of penalty may not call for interference by this Court. However he submits that the original Educational documents of the petitioner, including the original mark-sheets and certificates of his HSLC and HSSLC examinations, which were produced before the respondent authorities at the time of his initial recruitment, have been retained by the respondents and the same have not been released to the petitioner, although request in this connection was made. Page No.# 4/4 4. Mr. S. Z. Rahman, learned counsel, for the respondents submits that the said documents would be released to the petitioner on a representation being submitted by the petitioner in this connection to the authority, wherein the said documents are kept. 5. In view of the above consensus arrived at in the matter, this Court would not interfere with the order of penalty as imposed upon the petitioner and the same stands upheld along with the orders passed by the Appellate authority in the matter. However, the petitioner is directed to submit a representation before the authority, wherein, his educational documents are currently kept with a prayer for return of the same. 6. The respondent authorities on receipt of such representation from the petitioner shall within a period of 1 (one) month therefrom, release to the petitioner all his original mark-sheets and certificates pertaining to his HSLC and HSSLC examination along with any other original documents of the petitioner that may have been retained by the respondents, after receiving due acknowledgment of return of such documents from the petitioner. 7. With the above observations and directions, the present writ petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant