SAMAY SINGH Vs. UOI AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this petition, the petitioner, a Constable in the Central Reserve Police Force (hereinafter referred to as the 'CRPF'), challenges his removal from service due to habitual absenteeism. The petitioner was granted casual leave for 15 days w.e.f. 16th July, 2004 to 2nd August, 2004 and without information, he had absented himself from duty for a period of 123 days i.e. from 3rd August, 2004 to 12th December, 2004. The service record of the petitioner revealed that prior thereto also, he had remained absent from duty on five occasions during his short tenure of four years and the total period of his absence prior to his absence of 123 days, was 118 days. It is so reflected in the impugned order of 18th November, 2005 (Annexure A -4), which has been assailed in this petition.

(2.) Vide impugned order of 18th November, 2005 (Annexure A -4) the petitioner's revision petition was dismissed. Sequential facts, as disclosed in the impugned order, are that on account of unauthorized absence of 123 days, a disciplinary inquiry was held against the petitioner on the following two charges: -

(3.) During the course of inquiry, evidence of four witnesses was recorded. The first witness - Sh. Pal Siwal (PW -1) had deposed that after expiry of the sanctioned leave of 15 days, the petitioner had not reported for duty despite sending two letters to him, which were not even replied to. He further stated that arrest warrants were issued against the petitioner and in pursuance thereto, he had reported on duty on 3rd December, 2004.