Telangana High Court Strips Former CISF Constable of Pensionary Benefits, Deems Review Unsustainable
In a significant ruling, the Telangana High Court has quashed a single-judge bench's order that had granted pensionary and retirement benefits to a former Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) constable, Kishan Kumar Azmeera. The court declared the review petition "unsustainable in law," restoring his original penalty of removal from service without benefits.
Background of the Case
Kishan Kumar Azmeera, now 43 years old and hailing from Warangal district, joined the CISF as a constable/sweeper in 1997. Throughout his service, he accumulated a disciplinary record including two major and six minor punishments, primarily for unauthorised absence and overstay of leave. In October 2011, after failing to report for duty following a 13-day sanctioned leave and ignoring subsequent call-up notices, an ex parte departmental inquiry led to his removal from service on June 5, 2012.
Azmeera's statutory appeal and revision were dismissed by higher authorities, and a writ petition filed in 2013 was also dismissed by a single-judge bench in June 2018, upholding the removal penalty. However, in March 2025, the same single-judge allowed a review petition, modifying the punishment to compulsory retirement with pensionary benefits, citing Azmeera's 14 years of service and disproportionate punishment.
Court's Ruling on Review Jurisdiction
A division bench comprising Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice G M Mohiuddin heard the challenge from the Central Government and CISF. The bench emphasized that review proceedings under Order XLVII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure are limited and cannot serve as an appeal in disguise. It stated, "a review court does not sit in appeal over its own judgment, nor can it re-hear the matter on merits merely because another view is possible. The object of review is only to correct a patent error and not to substitute a different opinion."
The court noted that the grounds raised in the review petition, such as disproportionality of punishment, length of service, personal hardship, and socio-economic background, had already been considered and adjudicated in the original 2018 order. It found no new evidence or error apparent on the record to justify the review.
Personal Circumstances Versus Discipline
Azmeera, appearing in person, argued that his absence was due to pursuing higher education and emotional trauma from his brother's sudden death, who was also in the CISF, along with responsibilities towards his aged parents. He highlighted his impoverished Scheduled Tribe background and the catastrophic impact on his family.
However, the division bench observed, "While this Court is not insensitive to the respondent's personal circumstances... however compelling, cannot override the paramount need for discipline and accountability in a uniformed force." It added that Azmeera's failure to respond to notices and participate in proceedings demonstrated wilful disregard.
Operational Implications and Precedent
The court stressed that discipline and availability are foundational to the CISF's functioning, with unauthorised absence having serious operational implications. It stated, "to allow personal hardships to routinely mitigate penalties for absenteeism would erode discipline and set an unworkable precedent for forces where presence and reliability are non-negotiable."
Noting that the penalty of removal was not perverse or shockingly disproportionate for a habitual offender, the bench clarified that a different opinion on proportionality does not constitute an error apparent on the record. It concluded that the March 2025 order exceeded permissible review limits, rendering it unsustainable.
Outcome and Restoration
Consequently, the Telangana High Court restored the original June 2018 order, stripping Azmeera of all pensionary and retirement benefits. This ruling underscores the strict adherence to disciplinary protocols in uniformed services, balancing empathy with operational necessities.
