RAMESH RAM Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the appellant at length.

(2.) The impugned judgment has upheld the order of dismissal and the order passed in appeal, whereby the appellant came to be dismissed from service from the post of Constable in the Bihar Police Service. The charge against him was of unauthorized absence continuously for a fairly long period andthe defence taken was that the appellant on account of his continued ailment, about which regular information had been tendered, had not been able to attend his duties. The officials, therefore, erroneously did not consider this explanation of the appellant and in a mechanical manner the order of dismissal came to passed.

(3.) It is the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant that the punishment even otherwise is disproportionate looking to the background of the case and she has relied on a judgment of this Court in the case of Mithlesh Kumar Pathak Vs. The Union of India and others, reported in 2007 (Supp.) PLJR 97 Paragraph 14 to support the said contention.