IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.8580 of 2008 Date of Decision: 21.5.2008 Phool Kumar Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and others Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.C.PURI Present: Shri Rakesh Nagpal, Advocate for the petitioner Jasbir Singh, J. (Oral) By filing this writ petition the petitioner has prayed that a writ of certiorari be issued to quash the enquiry report dated 17.7.2004 (P/2), order dismissing him from service dated 20.9.2004(P/4). Further challenge is to the orders dated 29.4.2005 (P/5) and 22.2.2007 (P/7), vide which, appeal and revision of the petitioner were dismissed. It is apparent from the record that vide enquiry report Annexure P/2, it was concluded that the petitioner had remained absent from 12.2.2004 to 13.4.2007 (77 days and 19 hours), without any justification and leave from the department. Upon receipt of enquiry report, show cause notice, to impose major penalty, was issued to the petitioner. He failed to respond to the same, the punishing authority, by taking note of the findings recorded by the enquiry officer and evidence on record, ordered dismissal of the petitioner from service on 20.9.2004. Petitioner filed an appeal against the above said order, which was dismissed. He also failed in revision. Hence, this writ petition. It is contention of counsel for the petitioner that act of remaining absent for 77 days will not constitute a gravest act of mis- conduct, which will entail imposition of punishment of dismissal from Civil Writ Petition No.8580 of 2008 service. He prayed that impugned orders be quashed and lesser punishment be awarded to the petitioner. We feel that the argument raised is liable to be rejected. It is apparent from the records that the petitioner went absent on 12.2.2004. Entry in that regard was made in the Roznamcha of the Police Station, Sonepat. Thereafter, he came to the police station on 30.4.2004. He was transferred to police station Gohana on 3.6.2004 but he did not report for duty at that police station. Despite notice issued, he failed to join his duty. Thereafter, enquiry officer was appointed, who sent intimation of the pending proceedings to the petitioner but he failed to respond to the same. Ex-parte evidence was recorded and enquiry report was submitted on 17.7.2004, holding the petitioner guilty, for remaining absent without any leave/ justification. The punishing authority again sent a show cause notice for imposition of major penalty to the petitioner, along with a copy of the enquiry report. He again failed to respond to the same. Despite many subsequent efforts, he did not come present and explain his position. The punishing authority ordered his dismissal on 20.9.2004, by observing thus:- “On a careful consideration of the finding report, in particular of the conclusion arrived at by the enquiry officer and evidence on record I issued the defaulter a show cause notice vide this office No.468/SS dated 26.7.2004 alongwith a copy of the finding report of the enquiry officer in which I expressed my provisional opinion that for this act of gravest misconduct on his part punishment of dismissal from service be inflicted upon him. The show cause notice was received byj him on 27.7.2004. He was called upon to submit receipt of the notice. He has not submit his reply. Again vide this office 2 Civil Writ Petition No.8580 of 2008 No.554/SS dated 23.8.2004 he was directed to submit his reply and appeared before the undersigned for personal hearing, but all in vain. The defaulter has not submitted his written reply and also not appeared before me for personal hearing. I have again gone through the whole proceedings and am of the firm view that the charge framed against the defaulter has been proved beyond any shadow of doubt. I also perused his previous service record. He is habitual absentee. Previously, also he absented himself from duty from 9.6.2002 to 14.6.2002, 24.9.2002 to 26.9.2002, 20.10.2002 to 20.10.2002, 12.1.2003 to 15.1.2003 and 26.1.2003 to 29.1.2003. All this shows that he is habitual absentee and is not mendable. In my view he is not fit for Police Department. Therefore, I dismiss him from service with immediate effect. In my considered view, nothing short of this punishment will commensurate the misconduct exhibited by the defaulter.” He lost in appeal and revision. Even before us, no plausible explanation has been given for remaining absent without any leave. Act of the petitioner is such, which can be termed as gravest act of mis-conduct. Not only for the period in question, earlier also, he went absent on many times, which clearly proves that he is incorrigible and not fit to be retained in the disciplined force. Dismissed. (Jasbir Singh) Judge May 21, 2008 (K.C. Puri) 3 Civil Writ Petition No.8580 of 2008 gk Judge 4