CHARANJIT @ CHARANJIT SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in the instant petition is to the order dated 22.11.2006 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Commandant 13th Battalion, PAP, Chandigarh and whereby the major punishment of dismissal from service was imposed upon the petitioner, who was serving as a Head Constable. Further challenge is to the orders appended and placed on record at Annexures P-5, P-6, P-7, P-9 and P-11, whereby the Appellate and Revisional Authorities have affirmed the action of dismissal and even a mercy petition preferred by the petitioner has been declined by the State Government.

(2.) Counsel submits that the petitioner was appointed as Constable in PAP on 17.01.1989 and thereafter in the light of his good service record was promoted to the post of Head Constable. In the month of May, 2006, petitioner was posted at MLA Hostel, Punjab, Chandigarh, where he suffered a mental disorder and as such, was unable to attend his duties. While the petitioner was undergoing mental depression, departmental proceedings were initiated against him. On account of his medical ailment, petitioner could not join inquiry proceedings and ultimately, on the basis of an ex parte inquiry, the charges of being absent from duty were duly proved and which in turn have led to the passing of the impugned order of dismissal dated 211.2006 (Annexure P-1).

(3.) Counsel would argue that the petitioner was having 17 years of service to his credit and for which due weightage has not been given while taking a decision to dismiss him from service. Further submitted that the impugned orders cannot sustain as they suffer from a non-application of mind as the health ailment that the petitioner was suffering from was also not kept in mind. It has also been urged that the major penalty of dismissal is not commensurate to the charge of being absent from duty and as such, even a lesser punishment could have been imposed. Counsel has vehemently argued that not only the Punishing Authority but even the Revisional Authority have not given due credit to the petitioner as regards his unblemished service record as also length of service.