IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No. 297 of 2010 Date of decision: 19.07.2011 Constable Shankar Lal ...Petitioner Versus Union of India and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH Present: Mr. Sudhir Mittal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Navin Chopra, Advocate for the respondents. RANJIT SINGH J. The petitioner was dismissed from service long ago in the year 1993. The allegation against the petitioner was that he had questioned the wisdom of the Commanding Officer in sending the troops for duty by saying that it is not appropriate or that they were wrongly sent under the command of NCO. Despite the position having been explained to him, the petitioner declined to accompany the team and so he was substituted with another constable. For this defiance, he was marched up before the Company Commandant, who imposed the legal punishment on him for 15 days confinement to lines with drill. The petitioner refused to undergo this punishment and ultimately was proceeded against for showing defiance and was dismissed from service. The petitioner raised a challenge against this order before the Allahabad High Court on more than one occasion. After asking the petitioner to invoke alternative remedy available to him, the Civil Writ Petition No. 297 of 2010 -2- Allahabad High Court ultimately dismissed the petition filed by the petitioner on the ground of jurisdiction. The petitioner challenged the said order before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and his SLP was dismissed. After awaiting for all these years, the petitioner has now filed the present writ petition in the year 2010. At this belated stage, the delay would directly stare at him for which he really has no explanation to offer. The petitioner has failed in his challenge even before the Hon'ble Supreme Court wherein the view expressed by the Allahabad High Court has been upheld. Still, I have gone through the pleas and would not find merit in these pleas. The petitioner was member of a disciplined force. He was detailed for an official task for which he questioned his superior. The petitioner was rightly punished for showing this defiance which would be unheard of in the annals of the force. Thereafter, the petitioner refused to undergo punishment legally imposed on him. It was serious act of misconduct on his part for which he has no explanation to offer. I find no reason or justification to interfere in the impugned order even on merits. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed. July 19, 2011 (RANJIT SINGH) rts JUDGE