MOHD MAJNOON MIR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SINCE a common question for determination arises in all the above -referred writ petitions, all these petitions are being disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) FACTS are almost similar in all these cases. Petitioners were working as police constables in Jammu & Kashmir Police Department. They were holding substantive post. During the course of their service they absented themselves from duty. Some of them had gone on sanctioned leave but later overstayed leave without formal sanction or extension in leave while others absented themselves without any permission right from the beginning. Concerned Police Authorities allegedly issued notices to them to resume duty but the petitioners failed to report back to duty. Unauthorised absence of the petitioners from duty compelled the authorities to terminate their services/remove them. According termination orders followed which have been impugned in the present petitions.

(3.) ADMITTEDLY no enquiry has been conducted as envisaged by Rule 359 of J&K Police Manual by the concerned authorities while terminating the services of the petitioners.