CWP No.19256 of 2008 1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CWP No.19256 of 2008 Date of decision: 11.11.2008 Jagraj Singh Ex-Constable ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA Present: Mr. K.S. Kahlon, Advocate, for the petitioner. Rajan Gupta, J. The petitioner has preferred this writ petition seeking a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the impugned order dated 19th November, 1991, Annexure P-1, whereby he was dismissed from service. The petitioner has also sought quashing of subsequent order dated 20th July, 2007 whereby his review mercy petition was dismissed by the Director General of Police, Punjab. In brief, factual background of the case is that the petitioner joined the Punjab Police on 28th July, 1986 as a constable and continued to serve as such till 15th April, 1991. However, thereafter he absented from duty. On 20th April, 1991 a DDR was registered regarding his absence from duty. It was only on 19th May, 1991 that he informed his CWP No.19256 of 2008 2 Battalion about his absence vide TPM No.5258/PM dated 19th May, 1991. However, on 20th May, 1991, a notice was sent by his office at his residential address. The petitioner reported back to his Battalion only on 27th May, 1991 after remaining absent for almost about 37 days. An inquiry was thereafter instituted regarding his absence from duty but the petitioner again absented himself on 5th August, 1991. A notice had to be sent to his residential address in order to ask him to join the inquiry proceedings. However, the petitioner did not join the inquiry proceedings, due to which the same had to be completed ex-parte. Thereafter, a show cause notice bearing No.420/ST dated 30th September, 1991 along with the conclusion report of the Enquiry Officer were sent to the house of the petitioner through a special messenger because of his absence. The petitioner replied to this notice and gave reasons for his continued absence. Ultimately, the petitioner was dismissed from service by the Commandant, 75 B Battalion, PAP Jalandhar on 19th November, 1991. The petitioner preferred an appeal against this order which was rejected by the Inspector General of Police, Punjab on 28th October, 1993, Annexure P-2 to the writ petition. Thereafter, the petitioner approached this court vide CWP No.12461 of 2005. The said writ petition was, however, dismissed as withdrawn on 11th August, 2005. The petitioner thereafter preferred a review mercy petition before the Director General of Police, Punjab. The same was ordered to be filed in view of the fact CWP No.19256 of 2008 3 that his revision petition had already been rejected by the State Government (Home Department) on 26th March, 2004 and again on 18th July, 2006. The petitioner has now impugned his dismissal order on the ground that a single act of absence would not warrant his dismissal from service and that the punishment imposed upon him was unduly harsh. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and carefully considered the issues involved in the matter. From the record annexed with the writ petition it is quite clear that the petitioner was dismissed from service vide order dated 19th November, 1991, Annexure P-1 and appeal against the said order was rejected on 28th October, 1993, Annexure P-2. The petitioner approached this court for the first time in the year 2005 i.e. after a lapse of 12 years. This court was pleased to dismiss CWP No.12461 of 2005 by the following order:- “Present: Mr. Kuldeep Uppal, Advocate for the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petition be dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to approach the concerned quarters for the relief. Dismissed as withdrawn with the afore-stated liberty. August 11, 2005 Sd/- J.S. Narang, Judge Sd/- Baldev Singh, Judge” Thereafter, the petitioner preferred a review mercy petition CWP No.19256 of 2008 4 before the Director General of Police, Punjab which was ordered to be filed on 20th July, 2007 in view of the fact that his appeal, revision etc. had already been rejected. We are of the considered view that the present petition of the petitioner suffers from serious laches and thus does not warrant any interference. Learned counsel for the petitioner tried to convince us that the review petition of the petitioner had been very recently rejected vide order, Annexure P-7 dated 26th July, 2007. However, we are not convinced with this argument as the petitioner cannot condone the laches by filing repeated representations. It is borne out from record that the appeal of the petitioner was rejected way back in the year 1993. Thereafter, the petitioner kept quite for twelve years when he first approached this court by way of CWP No.12461 of 2005. Even on merits, a perusal of the impugned order clearly shows that the petitioner did not associate with the inquiry proceedings. Only after the show cause notice proposing penalty of dismissal was issued, he sent a reply in which he gave various reasons for his absence. The grounds given by the petitioner, however, did not cut any ice with the disciplinary authorities. We have perused the orders, Annexures P-1 and P-2. We do not find any ground to interfere with the findings of fact arrived at by the Commandant 75 B Battalion, PAP, Jalandhar and the Inspector CWP No.19256 of 2008 5 General of Police, Punjab. No other argument has been addressed to question the legality of the impugned orders. We thus find no merit in the writ petition. The same is hereby dismissed. (RAJAN GUPTA) JUDGE (ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA) JUDGE November 11, 2008 'rajpal'