HARI YADAV Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) This writ application has been filed on 16.09.2019 questioning the correctness of an order dated 27.07.1999 passed by the Superintendent of Police, Gaya, in the Departmental Proceeding No. 62 of 1998 whereby the petitioner was dismissed from service. He was holding the post of Constable at the relevant point of time. His appeal against the said order of the disciplinary authority was also dismissed on 16.08.2000 by the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Gaya, which order has also been put to challenge in this case.

(3.) The matter relates to an occurrence of 17.09.1998 when the petitioner was deployed at Pretshila Parwat police picket in the district of Gaya. The Naxalites are said to have attacked the Police Post and looted away 16 Police rifles and 640 cartridges after killing of two Constables. The occurrence had led to registration of Chandauti P.S. Case No. 115 of 1998. The petitioner was found absent from duty when the occurrence had taken place. The manner, in which, the petitioner was found absent from duty without prior permission of the competent authority on the date of occurrence, had led to initiation of a departmental proceeding against him with issuance of a charge memo on 26.09.1998. He took a plea that he had to leave the Post after having received an information about a serious ailment of his wife on 16.09.1998 and he resumed his duties on 18.09.1998. The charge memo has been brought on record by way of Annexure-2 to the writ application. He was charged of having deserted the police picket without any prior permission of the authority. The Inquiry Officer submitted his report holding charge against the petitioner of having deserted the Post without any prior permission to have been proved, which, in the facts of the case was taken to be and act of serious misconduct. The second show cause notice was issued to him, which, the petitioner had responded to. The Superintendent of Police, Gaya, being the disciplinary authority, considering the seriousness of misconduct of the petitioner, imposed on him a punishment of dismissal from service by the aforementioned order dated 28.09.1999. The petitioner had approached this Court against the orders of the disciplinary authority and appellate authority by filing writ application giving rise to CWJC No. 15687 of 2005, which was also dismissed by an order dated 19.06.2012 considering the fact that the petitioner had chosen to abandon his Post and his Arms and did not care for safety of other persons.