IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.658 of 2009 3 14.7.2009 Bishnu Dutta Shukla son of Shitla Prasad Shukla, resident of village- Bijoura, P.O. Sirsa, P.S. Meza, Tehsil Meza, District Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh .... Writ petitioner- Appellant VERSUS 1. The Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi 3. The Director General of Police, Central Reserve Police Force, K.K.Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi 4. The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Central Reserve Police Force, Patna 5. The Inspector General of Police, Bihar Sector, Central Reserve Police Force, Patna 6. The Deputy Director (Personnel), Central Reserve Police Force, K.K.Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi 7. The Additional Deputy Inspector General of Police, GC, Central Reserve Police Force, Muzaffarpur, Bihar 8. The Commandant, 87 Bn., Central Reserve Police Force, Panisagar, North Tripura ... Respondents- Respondents. -------- For the Appellant : M/s Y.V.Giri, Sr. Advocate and Raju Giri, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr Sarvadeo Singh, CGC ------- Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the Union of India. After going through the relevant facts which have been noticed and appreciated by the Writ Court, we find that dismissal of appellant- petitioner from service as a Constable, Central Reserve Police Force on the ground of unauthorized absence and desertion, does not suffer from any illegality. 2 In fact, we were taken through the order of the revisional authority pursuant to which the appellant was reinstated in service and given a fresh chance to defend himself in a de novo trial. The appellant on one plea or other, never joined the concerned Unit on reinstatement and did not take steps to defend himself in the de novo proceeding also. The plea by the appellant that he could not join duty on reinstatement because he was not given railway warrant for journey was rightly answered by the respondents through letter dated 17.2.1999 that he would be entitled for the benefits of a Constable in service only after he joins duty on account of order of reinstatement. Considering the entire facts and the conduct of the appellant, we are satisfied that the Writ Court was right in not treating the order of dismissal to be shockingly disproportionate to the charges. In the facts of the case, we find no merit in this appeal. It is, therefore, dismissed. (Shiva Kirti Singh, ACJ) (Anjana Prakash, J.) sk