STATE OF KERALA Vs. BENNY E

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The State of Kerala and its officers have filed this Original Petition, being aggrieved by the order of the Kerala Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No.2180 of 2016, whereby the Tribunal had directed reinstatement of the first respondent in service with consequential benefits. The Tribunal also directed that the first respondent should be treated as continuing in service without break and that the period he was out of service should be counted for all service benefits, except pay and allowances.

(2.) The first respondent had filed the Original Application seeking to quash Annexures A4, A5, A6 & A9. The proceedings/orders aforementioned arose under the following circumstances: The first respondent, while working as Police Constable at the Mannar Police Station, unauthorisedly absented from duty from 26.1.2006 onwards, without submitting the requisite applications and medical passport. On that allegation and also on the allegation that while continuing in unauthorised absence, the petitioner had worked as an agent of a multilevel marketing company registered at Chennai, an enquiry was conducted and report submitted before the District Superintendent of Police. Based on the report a departmental enquiry was ordered. As part of the enquiry, memo of charges and statement of allegations were issued to the first respondent. But the first respondent did not submit any written statement of defence, nor did he produce any evidence. In the departmental enquiry, an officer from the Mannar Police Station was examined, who on the basis of the entry in the General Diary regarding Over Sanction of Leave (OSL) of the first respondent, proved the fact that from 26.1.2006 onwards the first respondent was unauthorisedly absent from duty.

(3.) The seven days medical passport and consecutive medical certificates issued by an Ayurveda Doctor, submitted by the first respondent covering the period from 25.1.2006 to 28.2.2007 were also marked as Exhibits. The prosecution witness was not cross-examined by the first respondent. On completion of enquiry, Annexure-A4 report was filed, finding the first respondent guilty of the charges of unauthorised absence from duty and engaging in private business, while continuing on unauthorised absence. The enquiry officer found that the actions of the first respondent amounted to grave indiscipline and misconduct.