IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 9621 OF 2007 DATE OF DECISION: January 11, 2008 Parties Name Smt. Bimla Devi ..PETITIONER VERSUS State of Haryana and others ...RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH HON'BLE MR JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH PRESENT: Mr. S.N. Yadav, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. M.S. Sindhu, D.A.G., Haryana JASBIR SINGH, J. (oral) Order. Shri Ram Singh, who was working as a Head Constable, was removed from service vide order dated August 24, 2005, (Annexure P-2). He has not challenged his dismissal order. Petitioner, who is his wife, filed an appeal against the order of dismissal, which was dismissed on March 31, 2006 (Annexure P-4). Revision petition, filed by her, also met the same fate on May 29, 2007 (Annexure P-6). Hence this writ petition. It is apparent from the records that husband of the petitioner joined police force of the State of Haryana in the year 1979. He was promoted as Assistant Sub Inspector, as a direct recruit, in the year 1990. Under orders, passed by this Court, posts of Assistant Sub Inspectors were abolished and he was reverted to the post of Head Constable in the year 1994. It is case of the petitioner that her husband developed some psyciatric CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 9621 OF 2007 -2- disease in the year 1997 and he had been getting treatment from various Hospitals including AIIMS, Delhi. He went absent on August 8, 2002, without intimation to the department and even by now no proof has been brought on record that said Shri Ram Singh is of unsound mind and is not capable of looking after himself. Noting his absence, show cause notice was issued to said Shri Ram Singh. As per enquiry proceedings, show cause notice was received by the petitioner -wife and second time by his son. On the notice(s), it was noted by them that Ram Singh was not keeping good health and as such he was unable to appear before the Enquiry Officer. Beyond that, nothing was done. No attempt was made to put up appearance before the Enquiry Officer and bring on record any proof that said Shri Ram Singh was suffering from mental disease and was unable to look after himself. Having no option, Enquiry Officer proceeded ex parte and after recording the requisite evidence, came to a conclusion that Ram Singh was guilty of misconduct, for which he was liable to be dismissed from service. Thereafter, opportunity of personal hearing was given to the delinquent official but nobody appeared before the punishing authority to say anything about his mental state of health, as has now been agitated by the petitioner. Accordingly, order Annexure P-2 was passed on August 24, 2005, dismissing said Shri Ram Singh from service. Appeal and revision, filed by the petitioner, were dismissed. In order, passed by the punishing authority, it has been noticed that Ram Singh had absented himself without any intimation to the department for a period of more than three years. By taking note of a fact that it amounts to grave misconduct, dismissal from service was ordered. Before us, by referring to document Annexure P-1, an CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 9621 OF 2007 -3- attempt was made to say that said Shri Ram Singh was suffering from mental disorder of the kind that he was not in a position to defend himself. We have gone through the prescription slips put on record, which are only diagnose slips and pertain to the years 2002 and 2003. There is no document on record to certify that said Shri Ram Singh was not of sound mind. The petitioner is an educated lady. As per information supplied, she is working as a Principal in some school. If her husband was indisposed, it was incumbent duty of the petitioner to bring this fact to the notice of the Enquiry Officer. The petitioner or her son, despite service of notice, made no attempt to appear before the Enquiry Officer and then before the punishing authority when opportunity of personal hearing was granted to said Shri Ram Singh, who has not challenged order of his dismissal at any time. Under these circumstances, it is also doubtful as to whether the appeal and revision, filed by the petitioner, and this writ petition were maintainable. Counsel for the petitioner argued that while passing the order of dismissal, length of service of Shri Ram Singh was not taken into consideration, as such impugned order deserves to be quashed. Be that as it may, said Ram Singh never challenged order of his dismissal. He never claimed that he be given benefit of pension. At the instance of the petitioner, this benefit cannot be extended to him now. Furthermore, act of absence is such a major misconduct, which disentitles the defaulter to get any benefit. In view of facts, mentioned above, we are of the view that the CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 9621 OF 2007 -4- impugned order is perfectly justified and no case is made out for interference. Dismissed. ( Jasbir Singh ) Judge ( Jaswant Singh) January 11, 2008. Judge DKC