Rajasthan High Court Admits Plea Challenging Dismissal of Assam Rifles Rifleman
Jaipur, April 16, 2026: The High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench has admitted a writ petition filed by former Assam Rifles Rifleman Narender Singh challenging his dismissal from service, raising important issues relating to proportionality of punishment and adherence to principles of natural justice.
The matter was taken up by Hon’ble Justice Munnuri Laxman, who issued notice to the Union of India and concerned Assam Rifles authorities, directing them to respond within four weeks. The case has been listed for further hearing on May 18, 2026.
According to the petition, the petitioner was enrolled as Rifleman (General Duty) in 2017 and had proceeded on sanctioned earned leave in September 2020 for the treatment of his father. The leave was subsequently extended; however, during this period, his father allegedly became 100% permanently blind, requiring constant personal care. Additionally, the petitioner’s mother was also suffering from serious ailments following kidney surgery, leaving him as the sole caregiver.
Due to these unavoidable circumstances, the petitioner could not rejoin duty. However, the respondents dismissed him from service on November 11, 2023, citing prolonged absence. The petition challenges this action as arbitrary and illegal.
It is contended that no charge sheet was issued and no proper departmental inquiry was conducted before imposing the extreme penalty of dismissal. The petitioner further claims that he was not even informed about his dismissal at the relevant time and came to know of it only in February 2024 through official communication regarding settlement of benefits.
A representation seeking reconsideration of the punishment was submitted in December 2025 but was rejected by the authorities in January and February 2026.
The petitioner, represented by Advocate Sharvan Singh Tanwar has argued that the punishment is “shockingly disproportionate” considering the humanitarian circumstances and has sought modification of the penalty to a lesser punishment.
The High Court’s decision to admit the petition sets the stage for detailed examination of whether due process was followed in the disciplinary action.