AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
M.M. Kumar, J.—The short issue raised in this appeal under Clause X of the Letters Patent is whether repeated absence from duty by a Constable of Haryana Police deputed to work in CID would constitute grave mis-conduct warranting dismissal from service. The learned Single Judge has found that in a departmental enquiry the appellant was found absent from duty without sanction of leave from 5.8.2005 to 2.1.2007. The learned Single Judge has also listed 17 occasions when the petitioner has remained absent from duty for a shorter period of 2 days to 62 days. The same is set out below:
9.8.91 to 10.8.91, i.e. two days decided as LWP vide OB No.422/91.
25.1.93 to 27.1.93 i.e. 2 days decided as LWP vide OB No.127/93.
5.4.92 to 11.4.92 and 23.8.92 to 25.8.92 i.e. 8 days decided LWP vide OB No.218/93.
15.9.92 to 19.11.92 i.e. 6 days half pay leave vide OB No.240/93
20.11.92 to 20.1.93 i.e. 62 days decided as LWP vide OB No.240/93.
4.5.93 to 8.5.93 i.e. 5 days decided as LWP vide OB No.263/93.
21.5.93 to 25.5.93 & 29.5.93 i.e. 5 days decided as LWP vide OB No.288/93.
15.6.93 to 16.8.93 i.e. 62 days decided as LWP vide OB No.508/93.
24.10.93 to 29.10.93 i.e. 5 days decided as LWP vide OB No.402/94.
2 & 3.11.2003, 15 & 16.11.93, 12.12.93, 9.1.94 to 16.1.94 i.e. 11 days decided as LWP vide OB No.259/93.
1.8.96 to 20.8.96 i.e. 20 days decided as LWP vide OB No.283/93.
25.4.96 to 21.5.96 i.e. 26 days decided as LWP vide OB No.16/97.
29.12.96 to 6.1.97 i.e. 8 days decided as LWP vide OB No.165/97.
He was awarded punishment of stoppage of five future increments with permanent effect vide OB No.218/93 for his willful absence from duty for the period of 160 days in between 3.2.92 to 23.2.92, 5.4.92 to 11.4.92, 23.8.92 to 25.8.92, 9.9.92 to 20.1.93.
He was awarded a punishment of censure vide OB LPA No. 1895 of 2011 3 No.305/93 for his absence from duty.
He was awarded punishment of censure vide OB No.357/05 for his absence from duty.
He was awarded punishment of censure vide OB No.547/93."
Having heard the learned counsel, we are of the considered view that in the facts and circumstances of the case it cannot be concluded that repeated mis-conduct of absence from duty would not constitute ''gravest act of mis-conduct'' within the meaning of Rule 16.2 of the Punjab Police Rules warranting punishment of dismissal. The appeal is wholly without merit and does not warrant admission. Dismissed.