DHARMNATH SINGH Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the instant writ petition, the petitioner has, inter alia, prayed for quashing the order dated 10.08.2006 passed by the respondent-Superintendent of Police, Special Branch, Ranchi pertaining to punishment of stoppage of increment in salary for a period of one year and further salary for the period of absence i.e. 47 days was seized and the period of absence has been directed to be adjusted against extraordinary leave. The petitioner has further prayed for quashing the order dated 11.01.2007 passed by the appellate authority, wherein the appellate authority has modified the order of punishment of stoppage of increment in salary reducing the punishment of stoppage of increment from one year to six months, which is equivalent to one black mark and remaining punishment remained as such. The petitioner has further prayed that after quashing the orders dated 10.08.2006 and 11.01.2007, the period of absence may be adjusted against the earned leave and salary may be released to the petitioner for the aforesaid period.

(2.) The brief fact, as disclosed in the writ petition, is that the petitioner was posted as Driver in the Police Department. Because of suffering from back pain, the petitioner reported sick and applied for leave to transport officer on 06.04.2005, as is evident from Annexure-1 to this petition, but the permission was not given to him. The petitioner could not report to Headquarter on 10.04.2005 being Sunday and on the next day i.e. 11.04.2005 being Sarhul Holiday, he reported on 12.04.2005 along with all documents showing treatment. After showing the documents, petitioner went to Police Hospital, Doranda for the test and the Medical Officer referred the petitioner to RIMS, which has been mentioned by the petitioner in the application dated 12.04.2005(Annexure-2 to this petition). Thereafter, the petitioner informed the department in writing on 13.04.2005(Annexure-3 to this petition) that he is undergoing treatment, but the illness could not be cured till 06.05.2005 and he has been advised by the doctor for physiotherapy and thereafter, the condition of petitioner considerably improved on 26.05.2005 and then he reported for duty on 27.05.2005, as is evident from Annexures-4 and 5 to this petition. It has been averred in the writ petition that the respondent-authorities vide letter dated 28.05.2005 requested for medical check up of petitioner from Civil Surgeon through Board and the petitioner remained physically present before Medical Board on 08.06.2005 and the Civil Surgeon submitted his report on 25.07.2005, which suggested that the petitioner was suffering from back pain, but ignoring the same, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner and, accordingly, the petitioner submitted his reply annexing all the applications and medical prescriptions. The respondent-authority decided to hold departmental enquiry and, accordingly, the memo of charges has been served upon the petitioner. The petitioner submitted his reply on the charges levelled against him vide Annexure-8 to this petition. After completion of the departmental enquiry, the enquiry officer submitted its report. On receipt of enquiry report, the disciplinary authority inflicted punishment vide Annexure-9 to this petition.

(3.) Being aggrieved by the order of punishment by the disciplinary authority, the petitioner preferred appeal before the appellate authority and the appellate authority vide order dated 11.01.2007(Annexure-10 to this petition) has modified the order of punishment reducing the punishment of stoppage of increment from one year to six months and other punishment remained as such.