LPA No.77 of 2008(O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CASE NO.: LPA No.77 of 2008(O&M) DATE OF DECISION: March 30, 2009 BABU RAM ...APPELLANT VERSUS THE STATE OF HARYANA ...RESPONDENT CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMA NATH SINGH. PRESENT: MR.BRIJENDER KAUSHIK, ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT. ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J. C.M. No.304 of 2008 There is a delay of 8 days in refiling the present appeal. For the reasons mentioned in the application, the delay is condoned. C.M. No.305 of 2008 There is a delay of 6 days in filing the present appeal. For the reasons mentioned in the application, the delay is condoned. LPA No.77 of 2008 The challenge in this Letters Patent Appeal is to the judgement passed by the learned Single Judge dated 10.10.2007, vide which the orders of dismissal from service passed against the appellant have been upheld. Briefly the facts of the case are that on 1/2.9.1981, the appellant was posted as Judicial Guard at Jagadhari. The nature of duties was to keep LPA No.77 of 2008(O&M) -2- a strict guard on the undertrials who are confined. On the aforesaid date a checking was done by Dharam Singh, DSP who reported that the appellant was under the influence of liquor. He reported the matter to the Superintendent of Police who placed the appellant under suspension w.e.f. 2.9.1981 and he was ordered to be dealt with departmentally. The appellant was reinstated w.e.f. 21.10.1981, subject to final outcome of the departmental enquiry against him. The appellant was proceeded against departmentally and the enquiry officer after recording the statements of Dr. R.K. Jain, M.O. Civil Hospital, Jagadhari, Dharam Singh, DSP and other witnesses held that the appellant was under the influence of liquor. On the basis of report, the appellant was issued a show cause notice by the Superintendent of Police, Ambala as to why penalty of dismissal from service be not inflicted upon him. The appellant also led evidence in support of his case. However, the same was not accepted and he was ordered to be dismissed from service vide order dated 15.9.1982, passed by the Superintendent of Police, Ambala. The appeal filed by the appellant was dismissed by the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Ambala Range, Ambala Cantt. vide order dated 23.3.1983 and the revision-cum-mercy petition filed by the appellant was also dismissed by the Director General of Police, Haryana on dated 18.5.1984. These orders were challenged by the appellant by filing CWP No.4673 of 1984 which has also been dismissed by the learned Single Judge. Counsel for the appellant has submitted that even if the appellant had consumed liquor, the same cannot be treated to be a grave misconduct so as to warrant dismissal from service. It is contended by the learned counsel that the appellant had served for approximately 10 years, LPA No.77 of 2008(O&M) -3- therefore, he could have been burdened with a lesser punishment. We have heard the counsel for the appellant. The appellant was assigned the duty of standing Judicial Guard which is a very important Guard duty as he has to oversee the undertrials who are confined in jail. He has to also ensure that no undertrial escapes. It has been established in the enquiry report that the appellant was intoxicated and was under the influence of liquor on the intervening night of 1/2.9.1981. The Doctor and other witnesses who deposed against the petitioner before the enquiry officer have stated that the appellant was under the influence of liquor. The appellant being a member of disciplined force was required to remain alert and was also required to remain present specially during night time. This act of the appellant obviously constitutes grave misconduct which stands established. In view of the above, we find no ground to impose any lesser punishment on the appellant and accordingly this Letters Patent Appeal is dismissed. (ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA) JUDGE March 30, 2009 (UMA NATH SINGH) Gulati JUDGE