PRAMOD KUMAR NIRALA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Learned Counsel for the parties.

(2.) Petitioner entered the Police Department as a constable and he came to be appointed in the year 1986. In the year 1993 a departmental enquiry came to be initiated against the Petitioner because he did not report back to the force after expiry of 10 days casual leave which was granted on 27.8.93. Charges were drawn up in terms of Annexure-1. it also indicates that the Petitioner had indulged in similar kind of misdemeanor in the past for which certain punishments came to be awarded upon him. But those punishments have had No. sobering effect on the Petitioner. Enquiry was held, finding is there of the Petitioner's overstayal without any authorization, the disciplinary authority issued him a second show cause asking him to respond within fifteen days but the record shows that he chose not to respond to the said show cause despite the notice being personally received by him.

(3.) After taking into consideration the unauthorized leave of absence coupled with the fact that in the past also there are instances of his not returning to the force for long periods after leave as also the finding in the enquiry from his service record it was opined that his continuance was detrimental to the discipline of the force. The disciplinary authority carne to an opinion that the Petitioner was not fit to remain in service of the Police Department. The punishment of dismissal came to be passed which is Annexure-4 to the writ application. For similar reason the appeal and memorial contained in Annexures-5 and 7 came to be rejected. Thereafter the present writ application.