ROOPRAM KAURAV Vs. STATE OF M.P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE following judgment of the Court was delivered by :

(2.) THE appellant was working on the post of police constable. He was served with a charge sheet that on 10.11.1998 at about 10:35 p.m. he, after consuming alcohol in a drunken state, created a terror in public at Jhanda Chowk, Tahsil Gadarwara, District Narsinghpur. The appellant, in reply, denied the charge and stated that he had been falsely implicated by Sub - Inspector J. M. Koshta of Police Station Gadarwara. In the departmental inquiry which proceeded witnesses Shivakant Mishra, Sandeep Palodh and J. M. Koshta were examined by the department. After enquiry, the disciplinary authority found the charge proved against the appellant. The disciplinary authority, therefore, issued a show cause notice dated 20.1.1999 and on finding the appellant's reply unsatisfactory, imposed a punishment of his removal from service vide order Annexure A6. The disciplinary authority also directed that the period of appellant's suspension from 11.11.1998 to 2 16.11.1998 will not be treated to be on duty. Aggrieved, the appellant filed appeal, Annexure A7, which was dismissed by the appellate authority vide order dated 28.3.1999. Thereafter, the appellant again filed appeal, Annexure A9, but it too was dismissed vide Annexure A10. Undeterred, the appellant filed Writ Petition No.14307/2003 which has been dismissed by the impugned order. The learned Single Judge has held that the departmental enquiry was properly conducted against the appellant and an appropriate punishment was also imposed to him. It is in this background the present appeal has been filed.

(3.) IT is argued on behalf of the appellant that there is no evidence on record to prove the charge and hence the findings are perverse. But we are unable to agree with this submission. In the departmental enquiry J. M. Koshta has stated that on 10.11.1998 he had received telephonic information from Sandeep Palodh about the appellant's misbehavior in a drunken state at a public place which he recorded in the Rojnamcha Sanha, Ex.P2. According to J. M. Koshta he then went to spot and found the appellant abusing a mob in an intoxicated condition due to which a tense situation was created. Even this fact was recorded by J. M. Koshta in the Rojnamcha Sanha, Ex.P3. J. M. Koshta also stated that when he failed to pacify the appellant despite efforts he shifted the appellant to police station in a jeep where Shivakant Mishra made another written report. In the report Shivakant Mishra alleged that appellant in a drunken condition had also attempted to overrun him by his motorcycle. According to J. M. Koshta he had recorded this information in Rojnamcha Sanha, Ex.P4, and referred both appellant and Shivakant Mishra to a Government hospital for their medical examination. And the doctor after examining the appellant found him in an intoxicated condition with smell of alcohol. The doctor also found two injuries on the body of Shivakant Mishra. The reports of doctor in this regard are Exs.P6 and P7. The evidence of J. M. Koshta has been relied upon by all the authorities as well as by the learned Single Judge in holding the charge against the appellant as properly proved. The appellant could not show us any material as to why J. M. Koshta would falsely implicate him. In the fact situation of the case merely because doctor who had reported that appellant was in an intoxicated condition was not examined in the departmental enquiry, we are not inclined to disbelieve the evidence of J. M. Koshta. We have already seen that J. M. Koshta had systematically made the entries in Rojnamcha of every stage of the incident. This is also not a case of no evidence against the appellant. The conduct of appellant as police constable was apparently disgraceful and the punishment imposed to him is proper.