CW 574/06 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.574/06 Bijendra Singh Versus State & Ors. DATE OF ORDER : 17/12/2008 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI Mr. S.K. Singodiya, for petitioner Mr. J.K. Agarwal, Addl. Govt. Counsel, for State *** With the consent of parties, the matter is finally decided at the stage of admission. Petitioner was working as Constable and after holding regular inquiry under R.16 of CCA Rules, he was finally punished with the penalty of removal from service by the order of Superintendent of Police, Headquarter, Jaipur City Ann.3 dt.10th November, 2003 – against which he preferred appeal u/r.23 of Rules, copy of which Ann.4 has been placed on record in which it was specifically stated by him that because of illness it incapacitated him to file appeal in time and document to this effect was also enclosed along with appeal to the appellate authority seeking condonation of delay. However, the appellate authority without examining the appeal on merits dismissed the same only on the CW 574/06 [2] ground of limitation vide order Ann.5 dt.10th December, 2004. Counsel for petitioner submits that since the petitioner was not feeling well for sufficient long time, necessary document to this effect was also enclosed along with appeal seeking condonation provided u/r.25 of Rules, but without examining the same, his appeal was dismissed only on the ground of limitation which is not legally sustainable and requires interference by this court. In addition to it, counsel further submits that even the order of alleged disciplinary authority who has inflicted penalty of removal from service as per judgment of this court in Ram Karan Vs. State of Rajasthan [2007 WLC (UC)-484] was not competent to inflict a major penalty upon him. Thus, even the order of disciplinary authority itself is without competence which too is not legally sustainable. Respondents have filed reply to the writ petition wherein justification has been averred in respect of order passed by the appellate authority and at the same time, it has been CW 574/06 [3] further averred that appeal was not preferred within the period of limitation. Thus, the appellate authority has rightly rejected the appeal preferred by him vide order impugned Ann.5 dt.10th December, 2004. So far as submission made by counsel for petitioner with respect to competence of the disciplinary authority in passing order inflicting penalty upon him dt.10th November, 2003 is concerned, he will have an opportunity to make submission by raising additional pleas before the appellate authority, if so advised and this court is not inclined to consider submission at this stage. However, this court finds merit in the submission made by counsel for petitioner with respect to his rejection of appeal on the ground of limitation that certainly requires consideration. A perusal of appeal preferred by the petitioner specific averment was made about his illness and documents in support thereto were also attached and against the order of penalty inflicted dt.10th November, 2003 appeal was CW 574/06 [4] preferred by him on 29th July, 2004 certainly explanation of delay caused was required to be considered by the appellate authority while examining the appeal preferred by him. Even otherwise, where there is a provision of statutory appeal provided under the scheme of rules delay in filing is always to be liberally construed and it is expected from the authority to decide the appeals on merits and not on technicalities. Consequently, writ petition stands allowed and the order of appellate authority Ann.5 dt.10th December, 2004 is hereby quashed and set aside. Petitioner will be at liberty to raise additional pleas before the appellate authority within a period of one month, if advised and the respondents are directed to decide the appeal taking note of additional pleas, if raised, after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner in accordance with law on merits within three months thereafter. No costs. [AJAY RASTOGI], J. FRBOHRA574CW06 17-12.doc