V. RAVINDER Vs. DIVISIONAL SECURITY COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenging the legality and validity of Order No.X/P.227/Appeal/VR/2012 dtd. 20/4/2012 passed by the 2nd respondent confirming the penalty of removal from service the petitioner filed the present writ petition. A consequential direction was also sought for to reinstate the petitioner into service with all consequential benefits.

(2.) Petitioner asserts that he was appointed as RPF Constable on 16/4/1995. In the month of July, 1998 while he was on duty, he fell sick and was shifted to railway hospital. When the petitioner reported to duty and waiting for the GM.3 requisition, it was refused on the ground that there was a charge memo pending against him and he was served with a copy of the ex-parte enquiry report. Thereafter, the petitioner was served with charge sheet through letter dtd. 15/2/2000 to which he submitted his explanation on 23/2/2000. But without taking into consideration his explanation and the reasons for overstay from sick leave, the first respondent dismissed the petitioner from service on 6/4/2000. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner filed appeal which was dismissed on 19/7/2000 and subsequently revision petition was also dismissed on 27/11/2000. The petitioner filed W.P.No.365 of 2001 before this Court. The said writ petition was disposed by order dtd. 3/3/2011 setting aside the order dtd. 27/11/2000 modifying the order of dismissal to that of removal from service. Questioning the same, the respondents preferred W.A.No.483 of 2011. The appeal was allowed and the matter was remanded to the 2nd respondent for reconsideration and assessment as to the appropriate punishment that should be imposed against the petitioner on the proved misconduct. The 2nd respondent has passed the order dtd. 7/5/2012 stating that pursuant to the order of this Court dtd. 3/3/2011 in W.P.No.365 of 2011 and as per the directions given in W.A.No.483 of 2011, the order of dismissal from service has been modified to that of removal from service, vide order dtd. 1/8/2011.

(3.) The respondents filed counter stating that the petitioner reported sick at Railway Hospital, Bellamapalli on 3/8/1998. He failed to give attendance at Railway Health Unit, Bellampalli. Hence he was discharged for non-attendance with effect from 26. 10.1998 vide DNA certificate dtd. 4/11/1998. After absenting from 26/10/1998 to 4/4/1999, the petitioner appeared before IPF/BPA on 5/4/1999 when he was directed to report to DMO/BPA for fit certificate. But he did not bring fit certificate from DMO/BPA and absented unauthorisedly from 5/4/1999 till date and his whereabouts are also not known. The service of charge sheet on the petitioner became futile because the petitioner avoided receiving it. Therefore, the charge sheet was pasted at his door in presence of respectable mediators of the locality. The enquiry officer made several attempts to intimate the party for participating in the D and AR enquiry but the petitioner never bothered to appear. Hence the enquiry was conducted ex parte. The petitioner also did not give the reasons for his non-attendance. The enquiry officer submitted his findings that the charges levelled against the petitioner were proved and the enquiry report was served on the petitioner. Thereafter the petitioner submitted his representation dtd. 23/2/2000 after a lapse of nearly one month from the date of service of enquiry report in which he mentioned that he was under treatment of DMO/BPA up to 26/10/1998 and from 26/10/1998 to 4/4/1999 where he was under treatment of private doctors and he has produced a medical certificate covering this period. In that certificate the disease was shown as jaundice with rheumatism whereas the petitioner has mentioned that he was suffering from epileptic convulsions. The Railway doctor at Bellampalli clearly deposed during D and AR enquiry that the charged employee was discharged for non-attendance with effect from 26/10/1998. The railway doctor further stated that the petitioner appeared before him on 5/4/1999 with a reference from IPF/BPA on which he referred the petitioner to Railway hospital, Lallaguda and that the petitioner is not attending the hospital again from 25/10/1999. Therefore, the petitioner remained absent in an unauthorized manner from 26/10/1998 till the finalization of enquiry report and he has not bothered to intimate his superiors the reason for his absence during the period in violation of the stipulated regulations. The registered letters retuned undelivered from his residence. The petitioner neither bothered to appear in the enquiry nor bothered to intimate the Inspector or any RPF officers the reasons for his non-attendance/absence. Therefore, the disciplinary authority imposed the punishment of dismissal from service with immediate effect. The petitioner was hardly 31 years old and had put in only five years of service so far. The appeal as well as the revision preferred by the petitioner was dismissed confirming the findings of the disciplinary authority. Therefore, the 2nd respondent find no reason to interfere with the penalty imposed by the disciplinary authority which is commensurate with the gravity of charges held proved in the departmental enquiry.