SUDAGAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed the instant writ petition impugning the order dated 15.5.2009, Annexure P4, passed by the Civil Surgeon, Sangrur whereby while working on the post of Sweeper-cum-Chowkidar, he was dismissed from service. Further challenge is to the order dated 6.6.2012, Annexure P6, whereby the Appellate Authority i.e. the Director, Family and Health Welfare, State of Punjab has affirmed the order of dismissal passed by the Punishing Authority.

(2.) Facts of the present case are in a very narrow compass. Petitioner was appointed as a Safai Sewak-cum Chowkidar by Civil Surgeon, Sangrur, vide order dated 14.12.1981. FIR No.61 dated 26.5.1991 was registered at Police Station Ahmadgarh, District Sangrur and the petitioner was convicted under Section 30 of the Arms Act vide order dated 18.10.2001 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sangrur and directed to undergo six months rigorous imprisonment. The petitioner filed Crl.Appeal No.1275-SB of 2001 before this Court, but the same was dismissed on 24.10.2002. On 11.4.2003, the petitioner was taken into custody and having undergone the sentence of six months, he was released on 15.8.2003. Immediately thereafter, the petitioner submitted a request to the Civil Surgeon, Sangrur to be permitted to join back on duty and he was allowed to do so. After a period of almost four years i.e. on 13.9.2007, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner contemplating the imposition of extreme penalty of dismissal on account of his conviction. The petitioner responded by submitting reply on 3.10.2007. However, vide impugned order dated 15.5.2009, Annexure P4, the petitioner was dismissed from service. The petitioner availed of his statutory remedy by filing appeal dated 10.6.2009. Since no decision was being taken upon the appeal, the petitioner was constrained to file Civil Writ Petition No.2339 of 2012 in this Court and the same was disposed of on 9.2.2012 with a direction to the concerned respondent to decide the appeal in accordance with law after affording an opportunity of personal hearing and to pass a final speaking order within a period of six months. In purported compliance of directions of this Court dated 9.2.2012, the Appellate Authority has passed the order dated 6.6.2012, Annexure P6, affirming the penalty of dismissal imposed by the Punishing Authority i.e. Civil Surgeon, Sangrur.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has strenuously argued that the action of the respondent-authorities is arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Learned counsel contends that the petitioner had more than 27 years of unblemished service to his credit prior to the passing of the order dated 15.5.2009. It has further been argued that having undergone six months imprisonment upon conviction, the petitioner had been permitted to rejoin in 2003 and had worked to the complete satisfaction of his superiors till the passing of the impugned order dated 15.5.2009. Learned counsel argues that it was in continuation of the attitude of harassment and victimization that even the statutory appeal was kept pending and not decided for a considerable length of time. The learned counsel has also referred to the order of dismissal dated 15.5.2009 which is solely based on conviction and wherein there is no discussion as regards the judgment of conviction passed against the petitioner, the gravity of offence which led to his conviction as also whether the offence involved any moral turpitude. Learned counsel further argues that even the grounds and submissions raised in the appeal dated 10.6.2009, Annexure P5, have not been considered and dealt with by the Appellate Authority while passing the order dated 6.6.2012, Annexure P6.