$~63 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010438742026 + W.P.(C) 13512/2026 & CM APPL. 63021/2026 – EXMP. FROM FILING TYPED COPIES ASSTT COMDT VIKRAM SINGH .....Petitioner Through: Mr. A.K. Singh, Mr. Gourav Prasad and Mr. Ankit Kumar, Advocates. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS .....Respondents Through: Mr Ranjeet Pandey, Senior Panel Counsel with Mr. Kartik Solanki, Advocate for UOI/R-1 to R-3. Mr. Ishkaran Singh Bhandari, CGSC, Mr. Piyush Yadav and Mr. Abhijeet Singh, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NITIN WASUDEO SAMBRE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT SHARMA O R D E R % 16.09.2026 1. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. The prayer in the present petition reads thus: “a) Quash the order dated 02.06.2022 passed by respondent no.3 with respect to stoppage of increment of pay for three years and on expiry of the said period the reduction will have the effect of postponing future increment of pay of the petitioner. b) Further direct the Respondent No.2 to Restore the increments of the Petitioner alongwith consequential benefits. c) Pass such other or further orders be also passed as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case and to meet the ends of justice.” 3. The petitioner has sought quashing of the order dated 2nd June, 2022, whereby, petitioner was imposed punishment after conducting an enquiry. Following punishment was imposed vide order dated 2nd June, 2022: This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 22/09/2026 at 11:07:32 “12. NOW, THEREFORE, in the light of above and having regard to all the aspects of the case, the President considers that the ends of justice would be met in this case, if the penalty of "reduction to a lower stage in the time scale of pay by two stages for a period of three years with further direction that he will not earn increments of pay during the period of such reduction and on expiry of the said period, the reduction will have the effect of postponing future increments of his pay" is imposed upon Shri Vikram Singh, Asst. Comdt (IRLA-9649) of 39 Bn, CRPF, (Presently posted in 199 Bn, CRPF) the Charged Officer with immediate effect and orders accordingly.” 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that: a) The mitigating circumstance which prompted the petitioner to overstay for more than 14 months are for the compelling reasons, viz, the ailment of his mother, ailment of his wife and his own ailment. According to him, the punishment imposed is disproportionate. b) The issue was considered by the Division Bench of this Court in Chhattar Singh v. Union of India & Anr., 2025:DHC:10782-DB and has drawn support from Rule-11 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965, so as to urge that the imposition of penalty can be said to be ultra vires. 5. As against above, learned counsel for the respondents has supported the impugned order dated 2nd June, 2022. According to him, the petitioner remained absent from service from 24th December, 2018 and joined on 17th February, 2020. Further, the petitioner was manning the post of Assistant Commandant which is much sensitive to supervise a company. 6. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the petitioner is part of a disciplined force and as such cannot be permitted to conduct himself in an undisciplined manner. It is further urged that the punishment imposed is This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 22/09/2026 at 11:07:32 much proportionate and was after considering the explanation tendered by the petitioner, as the opportunity was duly afforded. 7. Having gone through the record and in the backdrop of the same, the petitioner was served with the chargesheet and following charges were levelled against the petitioner: “3. AND WHEREAS, the Articles of Charge leveled against the aforesaid Officer read as under:- ARTICLE-I That Shri Vikram Singh, Assistant Commandant (IRLA-9649) of 39 Bn, CRPF has committed an act of serious misconduct in that he unauthorisedly and willfully overstayed from leave for 420 days w.e.f 24.12.2018 to 16.02.2020 after expiry of 6 days Casual Leave sanctioned to him by the competent authority vide office order No. L.11-1/2018-39-ST dated 28.11.2018 w.e.f 17.12.2018 to 22.12.2018 with permission to avail 16.12.2018 and 23.12.2018 being Sundays. Thus, he has failed to maintain devotion to duly and acted in a manner unbecoming of a Government servant and has thereby violated the provisions contained in Rule 3 (1) (ii) & (iii) of CCS (Conduct) Rules, 1964. ARTICLE-II That during the aforesaid period and while posted in 39 Bn, CRPF, Shri Vikram Singh, Assistant Commandant (IRLA-9649) has committed an act of serious misconduct in that he has failed to comply with the lawful orders/directions issued by his controlling authority i.e. Commandant 39 Bn, CRPF vide letter No. L.11- 1/2018-39-Steno dated 26.12.2018, letters No. L.II-1/2019-39- Steno 02.01.2019, 15.01.2019, 20.02.2019, 14.03.2019, 27.03.2019, 18.04.2019, 24.05.2019 and 29.06.2019 directing him therein to report at Composite Hospital, CRPF, New Delhi for treatment or at Unit HQr. Thus, the said officer has failed to maintain devotion to duty and has acted in a manner unbecoming of a Govt servant and has thereby violated the provisions contained in Rule 3 (1) (ii) & (iii) of CCS (Conduct) Rules, 1964.” 8. It appears that the petitioner had submitted a written statement on 2nd July, 2020 denying the charge having been levelled against him. The enquiry was accordingly conducted and 5 witnesses were examined in addition to 22 This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 22/09/2026 at 11:07:32 prosecution exhibits. The respondents thereafter proceeded to consider the claim of the petitioner in the backdrop of Rule 15 of CCS (CCA) Rule, 1965. Subsequent to the conclusion of enquiry, the same was forwarded to UPSC and upon advice of UPSC, the punishment came to be imposed. 9. In view of the fact that the petitioner remained on unauthorised absence from 24th December, 2018 to 16th February, 2020 and since his movement was not completely restricted, the punishment was imposed. Even if the petitioner was under treatment for jaundice, that by itself does not paralyse his movement to report for the duty for such a long period of approximately 420 days. 10. The aforesaid factual matrix rightly prompted the respondents to impose the punishment as he remained absent from the duty for more than 420 days. As far as the contention of the petitioner that the judgment in the matter of Chattar Singh (supra) is attracted, in the facts of the present case, it has to be observed that the punishment imposed against the petitioner is in the form of major penalty and such penalties can be imposed under the Service Rules. It is not the case that the imposition of major penalty vide judgment in the matter of Chattar Singh (supra) was held to be illegal. As such, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the law laid down in the matter of Chattar Singh (supra) is not applicable to the present case. 11. The appropriate reasons are furnished by the competent authority in the matter, including punishment against the petitioner for overstaying. Apart from above, the petition also suffers from delay and lapses as there is unexplained delay in filing the petition i.e. after a delay of 4 years. That being so, no case for interference is made out. The petition is as such is dismissed and disposed of. This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 22/09/2026 at 11:07:32 12. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. 13. Order be uploaded on the website of this Court, forthwith. NITIN WASUDEO SAMBRE, J AMIT SHARMA, J SEPTEMBER 16, 2026/bsr/sg This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 22/09/2026 at 11:07:32