IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.19093 of 2011 DATE OF DECISION: December 01, 2011 Harpal Singh …..Petitioner versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA Present: Mr.T.P. Singh, Advocate for the petitioner .. RAJAN GUPTA, J.: (Oral) The petitioner has posed a challenge to orders Annexures P-1 to P-4 whereby his two years of service has been forfeited on permanent basis. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that absence from duty cannot be construed as an act of gravest misconduct. He submits that merely for remaining absent for 12 days, 22 hours and 30 minutes, major penalty has been imposed on the petitioner which is unwarranted. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner. It appears petitioner joined the Punjab Police as Constable on 9.2.1989. In the year 1993, he was posted as Guard in GO Mess of 2nd CDO Battalion. On 16.4.1993, he absented from duty. A charge-sheet was thereafter served on him and enquiry commenced. On conclusion of enquiry, petitioner was found guilty and show cause notice dated 27.7.1993 (Annexure P-1) was served on him proposing to terminate his services. The petitioner filed reply. Commandant 2nd Battallion, Bahadurgarh (Patiala) thereafter Civil Writ Petition No.19093 of 2011 - 2 - passed order dated 24.8.1993 (Annexure P-2 ) forfeiting two years service of petitioner on permanent basis. The petitioner preferred appeal against order Annexure P-2 which was rejected by DIG of Police, Patiala Range vide order dated 14.2.2005 (Annexure P-3). His revision met with same fate and was rejected vide order dated 29.1.2007 (Annexure P-4). Hence, the instant writ petition. It is apparent that pursuant to the charge-sheet issued due opportunity of hearing was granted to the petitioner as envisaged by rules. No infirmity with the disciplinary proceedings has been pointed out. Only contention raised by learned counsel is that absence period being less major penalty could not have been imposed. He has relied upon judgment of a Division Bench of this court reported as Dhan Singh vs. State of Haryana and others, 2008(3) S.C.T. 816. In said case, employee had remained absent for certain period. He was thus dismissed from service. The court came to the conclusion that absence could not be treated as gravest misconduct inviting punishment of dismissal from service. Same was, thus, unwarranted. Ratio of said case is not applicable to the instant case as lesser penalty has been imposed on the petitioner forfeiting his two years service on permanent basis. This apart the petitioner preferred appeal against impugned order (Annexure P-2) after lapse of 11 years before respondent No.4. Yet he entertained the same and came to the conclusion that the punishment was commensurate with gravity of misconduct. It needs to be emphasised here 2 Civil Writ Petition No.19093 of 2011 - 3 - that petitioner is a member of the armed force and is supposed to act in traditions of the same. His absence for a period of more than 12 days has attracted the punishment imposed. I am of the considered view that no case for interference in writ jurisdiction of this court is made out. Dismissed. December 01, 2011 ( RAJAN GUPTA ) pc JUDGE 3