Constable Kuldip Singh v. State of Haryana & Ors.

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH Present : Mr. Hari Singh Mann, Advocate, for the petitioner. AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (ORAL) Petitioner has approached this Court challenging the order dated 15.12.2005 passed by the Superintendent of Police, Sonepat and the order dated 13.04.2006 (Annexure P-3) passed by the Inspector General of Police, Rohtak Range, Rohtak, on the ground that the said order is illegal and not in consonance with law. Petitioner submitted that he joined as a Constable on

13.10.1989. During the year 2004-05, petitioner was posted at Police Station Mohana, District Sonepat when he absented himself CWP No. 9122 of 2012 2 from duty for 134 days, 9 hours and 55 minutes. A departmental enquiry was held against him, in which findings were returned that the petitioner was guilty of the charges levelled against him, which led to the issuance of a show cause notice to the petitioner, to which the petitioner responded. The punishing authority did not accept the explanation put forth by the petitioner resulting in termination of his services on 13.01.2006 (Annexure P-2). An appeal preferred by the petitioner was partly accepted by the Inspector General of Police vide order dated 13.04.2006, wherein order of termination was set aside but three annual increments with permanent effect were stopped. It is this order, which is being challenged by the petitioner through this writ petition. There is an inordinate and unexplained delay on the part of the petitioner in approaching this Court. The explanation, which has been put forth by the petitioner for now filing the writ petition, is that initially his father was unwell, who ultimately expired and thereafter, there was a criminal case registered against him, in which he was ultimately acquitted and, therefore, now he has approached this Court by way of the present writ petition. The explanation put forth by the petitioner does not carry any persuasive effect. There was nothing which would stop the petitioner in approaching this Court earlier to this and in fact, the punishment now imposed upon the petitioner vide the impugned order dated 13.04.2006 by the Inspector General of Police is in fact a CWP No. 9122 of 2012 3 concession given to the petitioner which the petitioner probably did not deserve as being a member of the disciplined force. He could not be absent from duty for such a long period and that too, without any intimation to the department. Finding no merit in the present writ petition, the same stands dismissed both on the question of delay and on merits. May 16, 2012 (AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ) JUDGE