CWP No.20441 of 2009.doc - 1 – HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP No.20441 of 2009 Date of Decision: 24.02.2010 **** Sukhwinder Singh . . . . Petitioner VS. State of Punjab and others . . . . . Respondents **** CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT **** 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? **** Present: Mr. Jatin Salwan, Advocate for the petitioner ***** SURYA KANT J. (ORAL) (1). The petitioner is an Ex-Constable of Punjab Police. He seeks quashing of the order dated 30.09.2005 (Annexure P1), whereby, he has been dismissed from service as well as the subsequent orders dated 30.06.2008, 20.12.2008, 19.08.2009 (Annexures P2, P3 and P4 respectively), whereby, his appeal/revision/mercy petition etc. against the dismissal order, have been dismissed. (2). The petitioner was recruited as a Constable on 11.12.1989. While he was on patrolling duty, he is alleged to have received an urgent message from his family and he suddenly disappeared from the CWP No.20441 of 2009.doc - 2 – duties on 06.04.2004. The petitioner resumed his duties on 02.02.2005. In this manner, he remained absent for 210 days and 18 hours. The petitioner was charge-sheeted, followed by a departmental enquiry. He was thereafter served with a show cause notice dated 30.05.2005 along with the enquiry report and was given time to submit his reply, if any. As the petitioner did not submit his reply, was further time was granted vide show cause notices dated 20.06.2005 and 20.07.2005. Having received no response, the Senior Superintendent of Police, Hoshiarpur dismissed the petitioner from service vide the impugned order dated 30.09.2005 (Annexure P1). (3). The appeal/revision preferred by the petitioner have also met with the same fate. (4). I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner at some length and also perused the impugned orders. (5). It may be noticed here that the Disciplinary Authority took notice of the fact that the petitioner was recruited as a Constable on 11.12.1989 and the length of his service did not entitle him for pension. As regards the gravity of misconduct, in my considered view, a member of the Disciplined CWP No.20441 of 2009.doc - 3 – Force entrusted with the duty to maintain law and order, if absents from duty like the petitioner, it shall tantamount to grossest misconduct. The petitioner’s plea that the enquiry officer did not observe principles of natural justice also appears to be an afterthought for the reason that despite receiving repeated show cause notices, he did not raise such a factual plea before the disciplinary authority. In these circumstances, no case to interfere with the impugned order(s) by this Court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction, is made out. (6). Dismissed. (SURYA KANT) JUDGE 24.02.2010 vishal shonkar