JARNAIL SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) VIDEORDER dated 8.2.94 of Senior Superintendent of Police, Barnala, Constable Jarnail Singh No, 361/BarnaIa was dismissed from service. Reason for his dismissal from service was his absence from duty for a period of 110 days. He challenged his dismissal from service through suit for declaration filed by him against State of Punjab. It was alleged in the plaint that he had to proceed on leave under compelling circumstances, after the expiry of leave, he could not join his duty as his father was ailing at his native village Ramgarh, PS Bhadson. He died during that period which was treated as absence from duty. His absence from ditty was not wilful. His absence from duty could not be viewed as default when it had been condoned by Senior Superintendent of Police, Barnala contemporaneously while passing the impugned order of his dismissal from service. While passing the order of dismissal. Senior Superintendent of Police, Barnala ordered that period during which he remained absent shall be treated as leave of the kind due. No personal hearing was afforded to him while inflicting this punishment upon him. His dismissal from service goes against the provisions of Punjab Police Rules and Article 311 of the Constitution of India,

(2.) STATE of Punjab contested the suit of the plaintiff urging that he was wailfully absent from duty from 14.10.91 to 2.12.91, 29.12.91 to 4.1.92, 6.1.92 to 7.1.92, 10.2.92 to 15.2.92 and thereafter continuously from 24.2.92. He was asked to join inquiry proceedings. He intentionally avoided to join inquiry proceedings. He never applied for leave or reported for duly, order dismissing him from service was in tune with the provisions of Punjab Police Rules and the Constitution of India. On the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed : -

(3.) WHETHER the departmental enquiry was arbitrary and against the natural justice/police rules ? OPP