JOTISH MECK Vs. STATE OF MEGHALAYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this writ petition, the petitioner, who was then working as an Armed Branch Constable in the 4th Meghalaya Police (MLP) Battalion, has questioned the order dated 25.03.2011, whereby he was ordered to be dismissed from service after the disciplinary enquiry and the order dated 26.09.2013, whereby the departmental appeal filed by him was dismissed by the Appellate Authority.

(2.) Shorn of unnecessary details, the relevant background aspects of the matter are that the petitioner was charged with misconduct that on 02.03.2011, while being posted at Uzbekistan Embassy, Shantipath, Chanayakapuri, New Delhi, he was found under the influence of liquor; that he quarrelled with Bnc/368 Rivinsing Lamare and did not control himself despite repeated instructions by the Guard Commander; and that he fired 3 rounds of 5.56 MM INSAS Rifle Ammunitions in front of Gate No. 2 of Uzbekistan Embassy in the most irresponsible and wanton manner. After show cause by the petitioner and recording the statements of witnesses, the Enquiry Officer submitted his report to the effect that the charges levelled against the petitioner stood established, inter alia, on his own admission. The Disciplinary Authority, by its impugned order dated 25.03.2011 (Annexure V), accepted the findings of the Enquiry Officer while observing that the delinquent himself admitted having consumed liquor and having fired 3 rounds of 5.56 MM INSAS Rifle in an inebriated state on 02.03.2011.

(3.) Aggrieved of the aforesaid order passed by the Disciplinary Authority, the petitioner preferred an appeal; and for the appeal having remained pending for a long length of time, approached the then jurisdictional High Court in WP(C) No. (SH) 317 of 2012. The said writ petition was disposed of on 22.11.2012 with directions to the Appellate Authority to hear and decide the appeal filed by the petitioner within two months. The appeal having not been decided despite order of the Court, the petitioner filed a contempt petition bearing No. 26 of 2013 wherein, show cause notices were ordered to be issued. It appears that the Appellate authority received the notices in the contempt petition on 25.09.2016 and the very next day, proceeded to dismiss the appeal by the impugned order dated 26.09.2013 (Annexure XIII). The learned Appellate Authority observed that the misconduct imputed on the petitioner was of a grave nature and again relied upon the so called admission of the petitioner, of having consumed liquor and having fired 3 rounds from his service weapon.