STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. INDER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The State of Rajasthan is in appeal against the judgment and order dated 21.3.2007 rendered in S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.3541/1995 thereby setting at naught the penalty of removal of the respondent-herein from service inflicted on him by way of disciplinary measure.

(2.) The brief outline of the relevant facts as available from the records is that in the year 1992 while the respondent (writpetitioner in S.B.Civil writ petition no.3541/1995) was serving as Constable under the Superintendent of Police, Udaipur, he remained absent from duties from 13.5.1992 to 2.11.1993 i.e. for a period of 539 days. A memorandum of charges dated 6.9.1993 was served on him initiating a disciplinary proceeding under Rule 16 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1958 (for short, hereinafter referred to as "the Rules") imputing that he had deliberately absented from duties and that inspite of recall notices issued to him, he did not report back for duty thereby displaying serious negligence and lack of devotion to duties in violation of the departmental rules. The respondent-writ-petitioner in reply to the memorandum of charges denied the allegation of deliberate absence from duties and demanded that an enquiry be conducted. The disciplinary authority i.e. the Superintendent of Police, Udaipur thereafter, appointed an enquiry officer. As the charges levelled against the respondentwrit- petitioner were wholly based on records and the same were duly introduced in the disciplinary proceedings on behalf of the disciplinary authority, the respondent-writ-petitioner when called upon, examined himself. He stated in course of his testimony that while he was on duty on 13.5.1992 he suddenly fell ill for which he proceeded to his home at Bambora on the next day and took treatment from the Government Ayurvedic Hospital thereat till 24.5.1992. He testified further that thereafter, from 25.5.1992 to 17.6.1992 he was under treatment at the Government Hospital, whereafter he availed treatment at General Hospital, Udaipur from 7.7.1992 to 30.10.1992. According to him, he continued with his treatment thereafter. He mentioned further that meanwhile his widowed sister-in-law and child fell ill and eventually his child died. He stated that because of such unforeseen events and his physical illness, he got mentally imbalanced and as such, could not return to duty. He admitted to have received recall notices, but reasoned that he could not return for duty for these reasons. He also produced medical certificates of his treatment. The enquiry officer on the basis of the official documents and the evidence oral and documentary adduced by the respondent-writ-petitioner held the charges to be proved. The disciplinary authority i.e. the Superintendent of Police, Udaipur vide order dated 31.12.1993 concurred with the enquiry officer and imposed on the respondentwrit- petitioner the penalty of deduction of Rs.150/- p.m. from his salary for two years. The period of absence was ordered to be construed as leave without pay.

(3.) The next higher authority i.e. Dy.Inspector General of Police, Udaipur Range, Udaipur by his order dated 14.1.1994 being of the view on a consideration of the materials on record that on the proved charges penalty awarded was inadequate, remanded the matter back to the disciplinary authority for a fresh scrutiny and decision based thereon. Thereafter, the disciplinary authority by its order dated 18.3.1994 while reiterating the findings on the charges as before, imposed on the respondent-writ-petitioner the penalty of fixation of his pay at the minimum of his pay scale for a period of two years. The period of his absence from 13.5.1992 to 2.11.1993 was ordered to be treated as leave without pay.