WP(C) 2712/1999 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B. K.SHARMA None appears for the petitioner on call. I have heard Ms. R. Cho kraborty, learned Addl. Sr. Govt. Advocate. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for setting as ide and quashing of the order dated 17.08.94 by which the petitioner was dismiss ed from service pursuant to a departmental proceeding. The petitioner has also c hallenged the appellate order dated 16.02.95 by which the departmental appeal pr eferred by the petitioner against the order of dismissal was also dismissed. According to the petitioner, there was gross violation of the principle of natural justice in conducting the enquiry against him which was pertaining to charge of unauthorised absence from duty. Be it stated here that the petitioner was working as a Contestable under the respondents. In the writ petition the pe titioner has mentioned about two departmental proceeding initiated against him o n the charges of unauthorised absence from duty. In paragraph-9 of the writ peti tion, the petitioner has admitted that on receipt of the intimation that his mot her was suffering from illness, he left the place of posting by taking verbal pe rmission from the authority. According to the petitioner he received the order o f dismissal from service, but the same was not proceeded by any enquiry. The respondents have filed their counter affidavit denying the aforesaid plea of dismissal from service without holding any enquiry. It has been stated in the affidavit that the petitioner was deputed at Guwahati for law and order d uty w.e.f. 08.12.92 to 27.03.93, but the petitioner remained absent unauthorised ly for the period from 24.02.93 to 05.03.93. Accordingly the departmental procee ding being No. 11/93 was drawn up against the petitioner and show cause notice d ated 04.08.93 was issued to him followed by charge sheet dated 04.10.93. However , the said proceeding was subsequently dropped. After the aforesaid proceeding the petitioner again remained absent from duty unathorisedly for the period from 21.10.93 to 26.10.93 from the Battalion Headquarter at Lamding. In the affidavit it has been stated that the petitioner admitted the said charge of unauthorised absence from duty. The departmental pro ceeding being No. 13/93 was drawn up against the petitioner by way of issuance o f charge sheet to which the petitioner submitted his reply. Thereafter the enqui ry was conducted in which the petitioner duly participated. He was also given op portunity of cross examining the witnesses. On conclusion of the enquiry, the E nquiry Officer submitted his report holding the petitioner guilty of charges. It is on the above basis the petitioner was discharged from service. As disclosed in the affidavit, the petitioner again remained absent from duty w.e. f. 25.03.94 and did not return to duty thereafter. The departmental appeal prefe rred by the petitioner was also dismissed. I have gone through the materials on record including the impugned order s. On perusal of the said orders, it appears that the particular plea of the pet itioner that he was dismissed from service without holding any enquiry, is not a t all correct. The impugned orders will speak for itself. As noted above, the im pugned order of dismissal passed on 17.08.94 was followed by the appellate order dated 16.02.95. Long 4/5 years thereafter the petitioner filed the instant writ petition to which the respondents filed their affidavit in opposition on 27.02. 2006. The said affidavit in opposition has not been replied to by the petitioner by filing any affidavit in reply and thus, he has admitted the stand of the res pondents. Long 16 years have passed since the petitioner was dismissed from serv ice. For all the aforesaid reasons, I do not find any merit in the writ petition and accordingly it is dismissed.