RINKU KUMAR SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, has submitted that the petitioner is challenging an order, passed by the Commandant, 133 B.N CRPF, dated 8th December, 2006 (Annexure-'5' to the memo of petition) as well as an order, passed by the Deputy Inspector General of Police, dated 3rd March, 2009 in a departmental appeal, preferred by the petitioner (order at Annexure-'8' to the memo of petition), whereby, the services of the present petitioner has been brought to an end as the petitioner has remained absent unauthorizedly from 23rd May, 2005 to 8th December, 2006 and against this order, the present petition has been preferred.

(2.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the petitioner had taken leave for fifteen days and thereafter, he had fallen sick and was suffering from Jaundice as well as Malaria and several certificates have been annexed with the memo of petition in support thereof at Annexures-T, '2', '3', '3/1' etc. and, therefore, the case of the petitioner may be considered sympathetically. The petitioner could not report the respondents because of the aforesaid sickness. The petitioner was taking medicines regularly and was unable to attend or resume his duties. This aspect of the matter has not been properly appreciated by the Commandant, 133 B.N. CRPF as well as by the Deputy Inspector General of Police and, therefore, the orders at Annexure-5 as well as Annexure-'8' deserves to be quashed and set aside.

(3.) It is also submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that even otherwise also the punishment is shockingly disproportionate to the nature of misconduct and, therefore, also the order of dismissal deserves to be quashed and set aside.