SATISH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This regular second appeal has been filed by Shri Satish Kumar who is aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 31.5.1994 passed by the Court of Additional District Judge, Narnaul who set aside the judgment and decree dated 20.5.1993 passed by the Court of Sub-Judge 1st Class, Narnaul, whereby the suit of the plaintiff for declaration was decreed against the State of Haryana and the order of dismissal of the plaintiff from service was set aside.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that Shri Satish Kumar plaintiff (now appellant herein) was serving in Haryana Police and was posted in Police Post No. 5 of Police Station N.I.T. Faridabad as Constable No. 730/NNL, 1071/FID. On 30.12.1984 when the evening roll call was taken he was found absent from duty at 6.00 p.m. without any intimation or obtaining any leave from the competent authority. He continued to remain absent from duty without leave till 14.2.1985 when he resumed duty at 5.35 p.m. His wilful absence from duty without seeking any permission or leave from the competent authority was construed as gravest act of misconduct and indiscipline and an inquiry was ordered. The inquiry officer furnished a copy of summary of allegations and the list of witnesses relied upon by the prosecution to the plaintiff. The plaintiff denied the allegations and claimed inquiry to establish the allegations. The prosecution examined four witnesses. The plaintiff was afforded opportunity to cross-examine them. After the prosecution evidence was closed, a formal charge against the plaintiff was framed. Copy of the charge-sheet was supplied to him. He was given an opportunity to file written statement to rebut the charge. The charge was also read over to him. He pleaded not guilty to the charge and chose to lead evidence in his defence. He examined Dr. H.R. Yadav and Dr. S.S. Sehgal in his defence and closed his evidence. In the report submitted by the inquiry officer the plaintiff was found guilty of wilful absence from duty from 30.12.1984 to 14,2.1985. The Superintendent of Police, Narnaul, who was the competent authority, after consideration of the report of the inquiry officer held the plaintiff guilty of charge framed against him; called the plaintiff in the office and served a show cause notice upon him as to why a penalty of dismissal from service should not be imposed upon him. The copy of show cause notice was also supplied to the plaintiff. He was given 15 days time to give reply to the notice. After considering the reply to the notice and the evidence produced by the prosecution for establishing the charge and the defence evidence, the Superintendent of Police, Narnaul which was the competent authority, passed the order dated 15.10.1985 dismissing the plaintiff from police force with immediate effect. The plaintiff filed an appeal against the order dated 15.10.1985 before the Deputy Inspector General of Police who by order dated 26.12.1985 rejected his appeal and affirmed the order passed by the Superintendent of Police Narnaul. The plaintiff then filed revision against the order dated 26.12.1985 to the Inspector General of Police Haryana who vide order dated 25.10.1986 dismissed the revision petition. Aggrieved by this order the plaintiff filed the suit for declaration to the effect that the orders dated 15.10.1985, 26.12.1985 and 25.10.1986 passed by the Superintendent of Police Narnaul, D.G.I. Police, Hisar Range and the Inspector General of Police Haryana are illegal, arbitrary, null and void and that he was entitled to'be retained in service with full benefits.

(3.) It was averred by the plaintiff that while he was posted in Police Station N.I.T. Faridabad in the year 1984, he fell sick all of a sudden. He got treatment from a hospital at Faridabad and was advised three days bed rest on 26.12.1985. He got an entry made in the Daily Diary Report No. 5 in Police Station N.I.T. Faridabad about his sickness. On 27.12.1984 when he was bed ridden, a relative came to him and took him to his village on some urgent call from his village. On reaching the village, his ailment further aggravated. He got treatment from Dr. S.S. Sehgal and thereafter from Dr. H.R. Yadav. He remained under treatment of Dr. H.R. Yadav till 13.2.1985 and on resuming duty on 14.2.1985 he got this fact recorded in the D.D.R. of the police station. It was further averred by the plaintiff that the inquiry officer did not afford him reasonable opportunity to produce evidence in his defence and failed to consider the evidence produced by him before the inquiry officer. According to him, the Superintendent of Police, Narnaul failed to appreciate the evidence produced before the inquiry officer and the facts adduced by him in the reply to the show cause notice and inflicted punishment of dismissal on the same grounds. He also challenged the orders passed by the D.I.G., Hisar Range and The Inspector General of Police Haryana.