IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.M.Nos.19938-39 of 2009 in C.W.P. No.2154 of 1996 (O&M) Date of decision: 12.1.2010 Sh. Raj Kumar Taank. -----Petitioner. Vs. Punjab State Warehousing Corporation & another. -----Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH Present:- Mr. A.P. Bhandari, Advocate for the petitioner. --- ORDER: 1. The petitioner seeks restoration of the writ petition which was dismissed in default on 16.4.1996. 2. There is delay of 4916 days i.e. more than 13 years. Explanation for delay is that the petitioner never knew that the petition had been dismissed in default as his counsel never informed him. The counsel died in 2008 and thereafter, the petitioner learnt that the petition was dismissed in default. 3. Without going into the justification or otherwise for delay and assuming that there was sufficient cause for absence CWP No.2154 of 1996 of the petitioner or his counsel, we have heard learned counsel for the petitioner on merits. 4. The main writ petition was filed in 1996 against order of removal from service dated 21.2.1990 i.e. six years after the order of removal was passed. 5. Case of the petitioner is that he joined service as Technical Assistant on 15.4.1976 and was promoted as Warehouse Manager in the year 1986. He was sanctioned earned leave from 30.9.1988 to 2.10.1988, after which he fell ill and sought extension of leave. He received a telegram, requiring him to appear before the Chief Medical Officer for medical check up but he did not appear, as by that time he had become fit. Thereafter, he again fell ill and did not join service till 12.4.1989 when a chargesheet was issued to him, alleging misconduct of absence from duty from 3.10.1988 to 11.12.1988 i.e. for about three months. It has been further alleged in the chargesheet that he continued to remain absent. Enquiry was conducted. The petitioner filed his written defence statement before the Inquiry Officer. The Inquiry Officer held that the charge of misconduct to be proved by report dated 24.10.1989, Annexure P-2. Show Cause Notice was issued to the petitioner alongwith a copy of the inquiry report and thereafter, order of removal from service was passed. The said Show Cause Notice could not be served in normal course and a Public Notice was published in the newspaper dated 12.1.1990, to which the petitioner did not reply. 2 CWP No.2154 of 1996 The petitioner filed appeal/mercy petition to which reply dated 16.11.1995, Annexure P-13, was given that the appeal was barred by time. 6. It is clear from the inquiry report and order of removal that the charge of misconduct was duly established against the petitioner. The disciplinary authority after considering the Inquiry Report, passed the order of removal from service. Finding of misconduct is not shown to be perverse or otherwise vitiated. The petitioner was given due opportunity during enquiry. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL) JUDGE January 12, 2010 ( ALOK SINGH ) ashwani JUDGE 3