CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.4198 OF 2011 :{ 1 }: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH DATE OF DECISION: JULY 28, 2011 Prabhu Ram .....Petitioner VERSUS State of Haryana and others ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? PRESENT: Mr. R. S. Mamli, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Sunil Nehra, Sr.DAG, Haryana, for the State. **** RANJIT SINGH, J. Constable, Prabhu Ram (petitioner), who has been dismissed due to his long absence has filed this writ petition to impugn the said order besides impugning the enquiry proceedings and the orders rejecting his appeal and revision. The petitioner joined the police Department as Constable in the year 1998. He absented in the year 1993 statedly due to his disturbed mental condition. The petitioner states that he had undergone treatment at various places but his condition continued to CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.4198 OF 2011 :{ 2 }: deteriorate. For this reason, the petitioner could not attend the duties in the month of September 2005 and remained absent for 74 days 13 hours and 10 minutes. Though the petitioner claims that he had reported back on 18.11.2005, but the record speaks otherwise. The petitioner was charge-sheeted on 7.3.2006. Enquiry was ordered and conducted. During July 2006, the petitioner did not participate in the enquiry despite number of notices issued to him after having received the charge sheet etc. On the basis of a finding returned by the Enquiry Officer and due to continued absence of the petitioner, he was dismissed from service on 15.9.2006. After expiring of 2 years and 11 months, the petitioner filed appeal against the order of his dismissal on 17.9.2009, which was dismissed. Thereafter, the petitioner filed a revision, which was also dismissed on 23.12.2009. He had then filed a mercy petition, on which, as per the petitioner, no action has been taken so far. The petitioner has accordingly filed this writ petition. During the course of arguments, the main stress of the counsel is on the service of about 18 years rendered by the petitioner and accordingly he has pleaded for leniency and award of some lesser punishment. No doubt the enquiry was commenced against the petitioner, when he had continuously remained absent for 74 days, but the petitioner after service of charge sheet again absented and continued to remain so and did not participate in the enquiry. The petitioner was duly served the charge sheet and was supplied the documents but thereafter he chose not to appear before the Enquiry CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.4198 OF 2011 :{ 3 }: Officer. The Enquiry Officer sent various notices on 19.5.2006, 23.5.2006 and 6.6.2006 at the residential address of the petitioner. These notices were duly received by the petitioner himself but he still failed to appear during the enquiry proceedings. Thereafter, exparte proceedings were held against the petitioner, leading to the passing of impugned order. During the enquiry, number of witnesses were examined. Previously also the petitioner had remained absent on numerous occasions and was awarded punishments. The previous absence of the petitioner, as noticed in the order, can be noted and is as under:- “On dated 29.4.92, one day, from 10.3.02 upto 14.4.92-35 days, 15.5.92 to 28.6.92- 44 days, 17.4.93 to 30.4.93- 14 days, 12.6.93 to 18.6.93- 7 days, 22.7.95 to 1.8.95- 10 days, 29.6.95 to 10.7.95- 11 days, 21.5.95 to 27.5.95- 6 days, 3.12.95 to 5.1.96- 33 days, 8.9.95 to 26.9.95- 2 days, 11.9.95 to 18.9.95- 8 days, 26.1.96- 1 day, 11.10.97 to 14.10.97- 8 days, 22.8.97 to 28.8.97- 6 days, 6.12.97 to 13.3.98- 3 days, 13.3.98 to 30.3.98- 16 days, 23.7.98 to 24.7.98- 2 days, 10.8.98 to 11.8.98- 2 days, 30.9.98 to 4.11.98- 35 days, 2.12.98 to 10.12.98- 9 days, 31.3.99 to 14.7.99- 105 days, 13.12.98 to 6.1.99- 7 days, 7.1.99 to 16.1.99- 10 days, 6.4.98 to 16.4.98- 9 days, 6.9.99 to 28.9.99- 21 days, 2.10.99 to 11.10.99- 8 days, 25.4.2000 to 13.6.2000- 49 days, 16.6.2000 to 22.7.2000- 36 days, 19.3.2000 to 12.4.2000- 24 days, 11.2.2001 to 13.2.2001- 2 days, 1.12.2000 to 2.1.2001- 32 days.” CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.4198 OF 2011 :{ 4 }: The Punishing Authority accordingly has noticed that the petitioner is a habitual absentee and can not improve. The Punishing Authority duly took note of the facts in this case to observe that the petitioner is an indisciplined, negligent, indifferent and irresponsible. Noticing this to be serious lapses on his part, which can not be expected from a Member of Disciplined Force like Police and his continued absence, the officer passed the order of dismissal by observing that there was no other alternative with the authority except to impose the penalty of dismissal. The reference made by the counsel to some documents now placed with the writ petition to plead that the petitioner was sick and so could not participate in the enquiry apparently is a desperate move on his part to somehow get off the hook. If the petitioner had really been sick, then he could have easily sought leave. Any of his relative could have come forward to inform the authorities or the enquiry officer that the petitioner was not well. The defence now projected is apparently an after thought and so can not be accepted. There is, thus, no merit in the petition and the same is accordingly dismissed. July 28, 2011 (RANJIT SINGH ) khurmi JUDGE