KARNAIL SINGH EX-CONSTABLE Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, an ex-Constable in the service of Punjab Police, has challenged the order of the Senior Superintendent of Police, Ferozepur contained in Endst. No. 671- 74/s. T/h dated August 18, 1987, dismissing him from service and the appellate order of the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Ferozepur Range, Ferozepur Cantt. dated December 30, 1987, affirming the order of the Senior Superintendent of Police, in this petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) THE facts:the petitioner was suspended from service on May 26, 1986, re-instated on August 22, 1986, but did not report for duty till March 2, 1987. He remained absent from duty for 5 months and 5 days. The Senior Superintendent of Police, Ferozepur Range, Ferozepur Cantt. , who is the appointing authority, ordered departmental enquiry against the petitioner for remaining absent from duty without leave. The Enquiry Officer submitted his report saying that the charge of remaining absent from duty stood proved and the appointing authority concurred with his report. He issued a show cause notice to the petitioner as to why he should not be removed from service. The show cause notice could not be served upon the petitioner since he remained absent from his residence continuously for a long time. On verification, it was found that the petitioner was residing with his father-in-law. The show cause notice was accordingly sent to him on that address. He was not available at the residence of his father-n-law. Notice was served upon the brother-in-law of the petitioner in the presence of the Members of the Gram Panchayat. After receipt of the show cause notice, the petitioner did not submit any reply. Shri R. S. Chalia, Senior Superintendent of Police Ferozepur Range, Ferozepur Cantt. , who had issued the show cause notice to the petitioner was transferred from Ferozepur and his successor in office ordered that a fresh show cause notice be issued to the petitioner. The petitioner was not found at his residential address. The show cause notice was served up6n his wife in the presence of respectables of the village. The petitioner did not think it desirable to submit any reply to the show cause notice, which was served upon his wife. The appointing authority concurring with the report of the Enquiry Officer held thus:-

(3.) WHEN the writ petition came up for motion hearing before a Bench of this Court, the petitioner's counsel relied upon a Single Bench decision of this court reported as State of Punjab v. Chanan Singh,1 1982 (2) C. L. J. 21. Presumably the Bench did not agree with the conclusions arrived at by the learned Single Judge in the reported judgment and they directed that the writ petition be heard by a Division Bench. It is how this writ petition has been placed before us. In Chanan Singh case (supra), Chanan Singh, a Constable in the Punjab Police was dismissed from service, after enquiry, for remaining absent from duty. He filed a suit for declaration in the civil Court challenging the order of dismissal on the ground that it was void. His plea was that he had not remained absent from duty but had overstayed on leave. The trial Court dismissed the suit holding that the order of dismissal from service was valid. The first appellate Court differed with the conclusions arrived at by the trial Judge and held that the order of termination was bad as it was not a speaking order and the Punishing Authority did not advert to Rule 16. 2 (1) of the Punjab Police Rules, 1934 before passing the order of termination; that this rule provides that the order of dismissal from service could be passed only for the gravest act of misconduct. Remaining absent from duty without leave was not found to be the gravest act of misconduct for which the order of dismissal from service could be passed. The State of Punjab, aggrieved against the order passed by the first appellate Court, challenged the same in regular second appeal in this Court. The learned Single Judge in Paras 5 and 6 of the judgment observed thus: