MECKEN SING N MARAK Vs. STATE OF MEGHALAYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant/writ petitioner who joined the service as Constable in the police department in the year 1967 and subsequently promoted as Sub-Inspector in armed branch of 2nd Meghalaya Police Battalion at Goeragre was directed by the Commandant of the battalion on 5.5.95 to proceed to shillong to disburse the pay for the month of April, 1995 to the battalion personnel in Shillong acompanied by BNC Clyforth Sangma. On completion of his allotted duties at Shillong he boarded a night super bus under Meghalaya Road Transport Corporation bound for Tura on 7.5.95 and during the course of his journey at the insistence of a co-passenger he took some sweet offered by the said co-passenger and became intoxicated and felt sleepy. Later on arriving Auguri, he on being recovered from dizziness found that his service revolver with six rounds of loaded ammunition and the unpaid amount of Rs. 17,314/ were missing from his possession and also found that the said co-passenger was not in the seat. On reaching his destination at Tura in the morning of 8.5.2005 he informed the Commandant of the battalion about the incident, on the basis of which Tura Police Station case No. 617 (5)95 under Section 328/379 IPC was registered. During the course of investigation the appellant's blood, urine and sputum samples were taken and sent to Forensic Science Laboratory, Assam for analysing the same, which found positive test for "Chlorpromazine", a tranquilizer drug which can cause unconsciousness.

(2.) A proceeding being Deparmental Proceeding No. 10/95 was initiated by the disciplinary authority by issuing the charge sheet dated 30.5.95 under Rule 66 of Assam Police Manual Part-Ill as adopted by the Govt. of Meghalaya, asking the appellant to show cause as to why disciplinary action should not be taken against him for the misconduct committed by him in disobeying the instructions and discharging his duty in a careless and negligent manner, rendering himself unfit to be retained in the police force, on the allegation that he came from Shillong after disbursement of the pay etc. in a night super bus in civil dress carrying arms and ammunition and with undisbursed money amounting to Rs. 17,314/-, instead of traveling in the departmental vehicle allotted for that purpose, allowing battalion constable Clyforth Sangma to visit his home at Rajasimla without permission or knowledge of the authority and for the loss of the service revolver with ammunition and the said money. Thereafter a regular proceeding was conducted by the disciplinary authority by appointing an inquiry officer, on being not satisfied with the show cause reply submitted by him. The inquiry officer submitted the report with the finding that the charges have been proved. The disciplinary authority upon consideration of the representation made by the appellant against the finding recorded by the inquiry officer as well as the proceeding of the inquiry including its report inflicted punsihment of removal from service vide order dated 1.1.96 by treating the period of suspension as on duty. An appeal as provided under the Assam Police Manual was preferred by the appellant before Deputy Inspector General of police narrating the entire facts and also against the quantum of punishment being not commensurate to the proven misconduct. The said appeal was rejected by the Inspector General of Police vide order dated 13.5.96. The writ petition being Civil Rule No. 4048 of 1996 was filed by the appellat challenging the said order of removal as well as the order passed by the appellante authority rejecting the appeal, which was dismissed by the learned Single Judge vide judgment and order dated 11.4.2002 and hence the present appeal.

(3.) We have heard Mr. A. K. Bhattacharyya, learned Sr. counsel for the appellant and Mrs. B. Dutta, learned Sr. Government advocate, Meghalaya appearing on behalf of the respondents.