S N YADAV Vs. STATE OF MIZORAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) B.K. Sharma, J.- The writ petitioner who is the appellant therein, has preferred this appeal against the judgement and order of the learned Single Judge upholding the order of removal from service, which was passed against the petitioner pursuant to a departmental proceeding. Although various grounds have been urged, but the basic thrust of arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant centers around the grievance raised by the petitioner about the prejudiced caused to him due to non-supply of the copy of the enquiry report based on which the order of removal was passed.

(2.) We have heard Mr. George Raju, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. N. Sailo, learned State Counsel, appearing for the respondents.

(3.) The appellant while was serving as Assistant Sub-inspector of Police (ASI) under the respondents was taken up for a departmental proceeding. Be it stated here that the appellant was initially appointed as Constable under the respondents in the year 1984 and thereafter, he was promoted as ASI in the year 1989. The charge levelled against the petitioner vide memorandum dated 2.5.95 was that the appellant while was posted at place called Sairang shot at ASI Robert L. Hnamte of Sairang Outpost at his left thigh on the night of 12.3.95 at about 7:15 PM and thus the appellant was guilty of gross misconduct, undisciplined behaviour and conduct unbecoming of a police officer.