RAVINDRA MANDAL Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner was an erstwhile constable and had served the Respondent State for about 18 years before a disciplinary proceeding came to be initiated against him when it was discovered that the Petitioner has not been dispensing his responsibility and has been missing for a year and half but was drawing salary off and on.

(2.) A proper charge-sheet was drawn up against him, enquiry held and based on the findings the order of punishment of dismissal came to be passed. The said order of dismissal was upheld by the appellate authority as well as by the I.G.-cum-D.G. of Police in the memorial. The present writ application has now been filed challenging those orders.

(3.) Learned Senior Counsel representing the Petitioner submits that there is no clear and decisive evidence to hold that the Petitioner was absent for the long period of time. Some evidence supports him for the period he was alleged to have absent. He has supporting documents to show that it was for bona fide reason and that Petitioner was not given proper opportunity to defend himself in the enquiry which was conducted behind his back.