JAINENDRA KUMAR RAI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Shri Ashok Khare, Senior Advocate as sisted by Shri K.N. Rai for the petitioner. Learned Standing Counsel appears for the respondents.

(2.) BY this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for setting aside the orders passed by the Senior Superintendent of Police, Ballia dated 6.3.2007; Deputy Inspector General of Police, Azamgarh Range, Azamgarh dated 24.8.2007 and Inspector General of Police dated 4.7.2008. The Senior Superintendent of Police, Ballia removing the petitioner from service as Constable-No. 638 Civil Police and posted in the year 2004 at P.S. Sukhpura Distt. Ballia on the ground of his continuous absence form duties w.e.f. 30.8.2004, after following the procedure prescribed under Rule 14 (1) of the U.P. Police Officers of Subordinate Rank (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1991 (in short Rules of 1991). The punishment of removal from service without any pay from the date of unauthorised absence was awarded under Rule 4 (1) and Rule 4 (1) (a) (2) of the Rules of 1991.

(3.) THE appellate authority found from the statement of Shri Ajeet Kumar Singh, S.H.O. of the police station that the petitioner had returned back from duties and deposited the rifle and cartridges. THE duty was entered on record in 'Mahaviri Jhanda Julus' 'roznamcha aam' from 29.8.2004 to 7.9.2004. He did not return back and was continuously absent from 30.8.2004 and was reported absent in 'roznamcha aam' from 7.9.2008. No steps were taken against Shri Ajeet Kumar Singh for failing to report him to be absent from duties. THE appellate authority found that all other employees had returned back by 21.15 p.m. and that appellant was also reported to have returned and have deposited rifle and cartridges on 29.8.2008, but that on 30.8.2004 when the police party again left the police station to report for duties at 'Mahaviri Jhanda Julus', the ap pellant did not accompany them. THE entries in the police station regarding his presence from 30.8.2004 to 6.9.2004 with assignment of duties in Mahaviri Jhanda Julus' are incorrect. THE petitioner did not perform duties during this period and was not present at the police station.