R.S.A. No. 4324 of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH R.S.A. No. 4324 of 2010 (O & M) Date of decision:-13.12.2011 Ex-Constable Dalbir Singh ...Appellant Versus The State of Punjab through Collector, Gurdaspur and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI Present:- Mr. Vipin Mahajan, Advocate for the appellant. RITU BAHRI J.(Oral) C.M. No.13034-C of 2010 Application is allowed and the delay of 9 days in filing the appeal is condoned. R.S.A. No.4324 of 2010 Challenge is to the judgment passed by the trial Court dated 14.2.2009 and the judgment passed by the Appellate Court dated 22.5.2010 whereby the order of dismissal of the appellant has been upheld. The plaintiff was working as Constable in the office of Superintendent of Police, Police Tele-communication/Wireless, Punjab, Chandigarh. He was appointed on 08.5.1998 as Constable Operator. On 23.10.2002 he was sent to S.D.C. Amritsar to appear before Inspector Prit Pal Singh, Head Quarter, R.S.A. No. 4324 of 2010 -2- Chandigarh in connection with departmental enquiry against him. The plaintiff appeared before the Inspector on 03.4.2002 and thereafter he was relieved on the same day. He did not report on duty and absented without permission. The plaintiff was nominated to undergo O.G.T. Course on 07.4.2002 but he remained absent. He was issued show-cause notice on 19.9.2002 and thereafter vide order dated 23.10.2002 he was dismissed from service by the Superintendent of Police, Police Tele-communication/Wireless, Punjab, Chandigarh. His appeal was rejected by the Deputy Inspector General of Police vide order dated 23.12.2002 and the DGP rejected his review petition vide order dated 24.9.2003. The plaintiff contested all these orders by way of filing the civil suit. On notice, the defendants filed the written statement. It was averred on merits that the plaintiff was remained absent for 587 days on different occasions and he had been dismissed after adopting proper procedure. On 18.7.2007, from the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed :- “1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to declaration as prayed for? OPP 2. Whether Order dated 23.10.2002 passed by the Superintendent of Police, Tele-Communication/ Wireless, Punjab, Chandigarh is illegal, null and void? OPP 3. Whether Orders dated 23.10.2002, 24.9.2003 and 05.11.2004 are illegal, null and void? OPD R.S.A. No. 4324 of 2010 -3- 4. Whether the suit is not maintainable? OPD 5. Whether the plaintiff is estopped by his own act and conduct to file the present suit? OPD 6. Whether the plaintiff has no cause of action to file the present suit? OPD 7. Relief.” The trial Court considered the issue Nos.1,2 and 3 together and after going through the evidence led by the parties, came to the conclusion that the plaintiff had not led any evidence that he was not absent for 318 days on different occasions, as per Rule 16.2 of Punjab Police Rules. The length of service was only four years and applicability of Rule 16.2 was not applicable while dismissing him from the service as he did not render minimum qualifying service necessary for entitlement of pensionary benefits. The plaintiff was absent from duty for 587 days, as mentioned in previous record. The conduct of the plaintiff amounts to misconduct and the dismissal order not suffered from any illegality. Civil suit was dismissed by the trial Court and thereafter the appeal was dismissed by the lower Appellate Court on 22.5.2010. Counsel for the appellant argued that his absence from duty is for 58 days and the Department has taken the entire previous record for imposing the punishment of dismissal upon the plaintiff, this argument is liable to be rejected as absence from duty even for 58 days without sanction amounts to misconduct in a disciplinary force as held in Ex-Constable R.S.A. No. 4324 of 2010 -4- Jagbir Singh versus State of Haryana and others 2006(6) Services Law Reporter 222. Reference of the past details of absence which amounts to 587 days is to show that date of joining of the plaintiff was 08.5.1998 and date of dismissal was 23.10.2002, he has approximately rendered four years service and remained absent for 587 days. In view of the judgment passed in Ex-Constable Jagbir Singh's case (supra) no question of law much less substantial question of law arises for consideration by this Court. The Regular Second Appeal is dismissed. December 13, 2011 ( RITU BAHRI ) Vijay Asija JUDGE