MOHD IQBAL Vs. STATE OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ petition challenge is to order bearing No. 2258 of 1999 dated 21.10.1999, passed by Senior Superintendent of Police, Doda, whereby services of the petitioner have been terminated. In brief the facts may be noticed.

(2.) PETITIONER , a constable in the Police Department, was posted at District Police Lines, Doda, where from he was transferred to Banihal. He was directed to report at his new place of posting on 10..4.1999. Station House Officer, Police Station Banihal, vide his signal No. 1255/PSB dated 18.07.1999 intimated that the petitioner had not yet reported at Police Station, Banihal, meaning thereby, that the petitioner remained un -authorisedly absent from duty with effect from 10.4.1999 i.e, the date when he was relieved from District Police Lines, Doda, Vide Signal dated 20.7.1999, the petitioner was informed/directed through his home Police Station to report at his new place of posting within two days failing which he would be removed from service, but he failed to report for duty. Again vide signal dated 24.9.1999, Station House Officer, Police Station, Banihal, directed the petitioner to resume his duty but he did not bother to obey the orders and continuously remained absent from duty since 10.4.1999. Vide office order No. 2056 of 1999 dated 25.09.1999 a departmental enquiry was ordered to be conducted against the petitioner for his un -authorised absence from duty with effect from 10.4.1999. Meanwhile, another notice dated 30.09.1999 was issued to the petitioner through his home Police Station which was also got published in two local English Dailies, namely "The State Times" and "The Himalayan Mail" in their issues dated 01.10.1999, whereunder the petitioner was directed to resume his duty within a weeks time failing which, he was informed that, he shall be removed from service. Petitioner, however, failed to report for duty despite issuance of notices and their publication in the newspapers. Thereafter, vide office signal dated 4.10.1999, Station House Officer, Police Station, Mahore, informed the petitioner to resume his duty forthwith. Station House Office, Police Station, Mahore, vide his signal dated 5.10.1999 also communicated to Station House Office, Police Station, Gool, that since the village where the petitioner was residing fell in the jurisdiction of Police Station, Gool, as such the petitioner be informed to resume his duty. Station House Officer, Police Station, Gool, vide his signals dated 7.10.1999 and 9.10.1999 intimated that as per the statement of family of the petitioner, he was not available at home and had gone towards Udhampur. Since petitioner had failed to join duty despite repeated notices and failed to face departmental enquiry, it was felt impracticable to hold a departmental enquiry against the petitioner who was continuously absent from duty since 10.4.1999. The Senior Superintendent of Police, Doda, taking that it was not possible to hold departmental enquiry against the petitioner and also that earlier too he had remained absent as many as seventeen times and punishment in that regard was awarded to him, formed an opinion that the petitioner was not interested to serve in the police department any more and was a burden to the State Exchequer. He, therefore, vide impugned order terminated the services of the petitioner with effect from 10.4.1999, the date when he absented himself from duty.

(3.) WRIT petition has been filed by the petitioner impugning the order terminating his services. The only ground taken in the writ petition and urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner at the hearing of the petition is that the order impugned is violative of Article 311 of the Constitution of India, corresponding with Section 126 of the Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir, in as much as services of the petitioner could not have been terminated without affording an opportunity of being heard or without holding enquiry as provided under the provisions of the Jammu and Kashmir Police Rules.