Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


EX. CONSTABLE JAGBIR SINGH v. State of Haryana & Ors - CWP-16237-2006 [2006] RD-P&H 4992 (28 July 2006)


C.W.P.No.16237 of 2003

Date of Decision: 25.07.2006











This petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution prays for quashing order dated 08.10.1996 (P-5) passed by the Superintendent of Police, Commando, Newal, Karnal, dismissing the petitioner from service on account of his absence from duty for a period of 244 days. The petitioner has also challenged order dated 13.07.1999(P-8) passed by Inspector General of Police, Railways & Commando (Haryana), Panchkula, upholding the order dated 08.10.1996(P-5) and the revisional order dated 11.07.2000(P-10) maintining the view of the Superintendent of Police. The petitioner also filed review petition before the Director General of Police, which has also been dismissed on 11.07.2000.

C.W.P.No.16237 of 2003 [2]

Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed as Constable in the Commando Wing of Haryana Police in an open competition held on 20.03.1988. He was granted 3 days casual leave on 28.07.1995 and was required to report for duty on 01.08.1995. He failed to report for duty and accordingly he was marked absent on 01.08.1995 vide Rapat No.16 at 12.05 PM. It is claimed that he had fallen ill when he was visiting his relations and from there he was taken to private hospital run by Dr. R.E.Pandey, Retired Deputy Chief Medical Officer, Bhiwani, who found that the petitioner was suffering from Typhoid. It has been urged that he remained bed ridden upto November 1995 and from November to March 1996, he suffered from jaundice. On 01.04.1996, the petitioner is claimed to have been declared medically fit and came forward to join his duty at Commando Force Newal, Karnal. The petitioner was issued a charge-sheet alleging that he remain wilfully absent from duty from 01.08.1995 to 01.04.1996 for a period of 244 days 1 hour and 40 minutes, which is gross carelessness. For holding a departmentl enquiry against the petitioner, Sant Lal, Inspector Commando Newal was appointed as Enquiry Officer. He submitted his enquiry report on 13.09.1996 and came to the conclusion that the Medical Certificates produced by the petitioner were false and bogus, which were procured to fill up the gap of his absence. The conclusion reached by the Enquiry Officer in his enquiry report (P-2) reads as under:- "Conclusion: I have carefully perused the statement of prosecution, and defence

witnesses and come to the conclusion that the medical certificates produced by defaulter are false and bogus which have been only C.W.P.No.16237 of 2003 [3]

produced to fill up the gap of his absence.

Defaulter instead of getting the treatment in his home dist. Hissar or dist. Bhiwani in any Govt. Hospital but had secured the medical certificate from private doctor who is far away from the village of defaulter, which creates suspicion. The defaulter has never informed this office regarding his illness.

Now he has sent any medical certificates, nor he had sent any information that he is getting treatment. The defulter could have informed the Supdt. of Police, commando either by sending a special Messenger, or through post office, regarding his illness or could have sent an application for leave. From all this it is clearly proved that the defaulter has produced the medical certificates only to hide his absence. Prior to this the defaulter had also remained absent for 20 times. The

decision of which had been done in different dates, so the defaulter is habitual absentee.

Defaulter by remaining willfully absent

for 244 days 1 hours and 40 minutes and has not given any solid proof for this absence but by producing bogus medical certificates had tried to misguide the department. Therefore, C.W.P.No.16237 of 2003 [4]

this constable is guilty or remaining absent wilfully.

Sd/- Sant Lal 13.09.1996

Inquiry Officer Insp. Commndo Newal"

On the basis of enquiry report a show cause notice was given to the petitioner by the punishing authority i.e. Superintendent of Police, Commando Newal, Karnal (Respondent No.4). The petitioner duly replied the show cause notice on 03.10.1996 (P-4). However, the punishing authority rejected the reply of the petitioner by upholding the findings. The punishing authority has noticed that the Medical Certificate produced from private Dr. R.E.Pandey failed to indicate any registration number and on different dates, different diseases have been shown on the Certificate. It has further been found that all Constables who absent themselves procured Certificates from Dr. R.E.Pandey. The views of the punishing authority are available in para 4 of the order dated 08.10.1996 (P-5) and the same reads as under:-

"In the inquiry report the statement of

prosecution as well as defence witnesses are there on the file and in different reports on different dates it has been shown that he was treated by Dr. R.E.Pandey. When this

constable Jagbir Singh 294/CPfF P.S. Uklana Distt. Hisar and he had produced his medical certificate from Doctor of Bhiwani, only with a purpose to compete his period of absence so these certificates have been prepared. It is also the statement of the doctor that the C.W.P.No.16237 of 2003 [5]

constable of Haryana Police came to him for treatment. When this Constable is r/o Village Daulatpur (Uklana) there is no registration number on the certificate issued by the

doctor. And on different dates, different diseased as en shown. All the constables of Haryana Commando Police who became

absent brings the certificate from this doctor.

Who only does this work. I have perused

carefully the statement of defence as well as prosecution witnesses. I do not consider the report of Dr.Pandey as correct because in all the absent cases all constbles to save

themselves do like this. I hold this certificate as false. After perusing the report I have come to the conclusion that Jagbir Singh 294 CPF who had remained absent for 244 days 1 hour and 40 minutes so after discharging him from govt. Service an order to dismiss him from govt. Job and relieved. The order is passed. Copy of the order is given to the defaulter free of cost.

Sd/- Supdt. Of Police Commando".

The aforementioned order has been upheld by the Appellate Authority vide its order dated 13.07.1999 (P-8) and the Revisional Authorityu vide its order dated 11.07.2000 (P-10).

C.W.P.No.16237 of 2003 [6]

Having heard the learned counsel at considerable length, we are of the view that this petition is liable to be dismissed. A perusal of the Inquiry Report would show that a detailed inquiry was held in which number of witnesses including Dr. R.E.Pandey were examined. The petitioner has been given ample opportunity of hearing and to cross examine the witnesses or put his case before the Inquiry Officer. In fact the petitioner had produced defence witness. After considering oral as well as documentary evidence, the Inquiry Officer had recorded the conclusion that the petitioner was absent from duty and the justification for absence was stated to be his illness. The certificate produced showing that the petitioner was ill have been found to be false and bogus, which were produced to raise the defence. The punishing authority has further noticed that the certificates are not only bogus and false, but the certificates have been issued on different dates and even the disease given in the certificate are different. It has also been found that the constable of Commando Force usually go to Dr. R.E.Pandey for issuance of such certificates. It is well settled that this Court cannot sit in appeal over the findings recorded by the Inquiry Officer as accepted by the punishing authority, appellate authority and the revisional authority. For the aforementioned purpose, reliance may be placed on a judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of B.C.Chaturvedi v. Union of India 1995(6) SCC, 749. Learned counsel for the petitioner has failed to disclose any illegality on the part of the Inquiry Officer in following the procedure applicable to hold such inquiry or violation of any principle of natural justice, like refusal to cross examine the witnesses or bringing on record the evidence by the petitioner.

We are further of the view that absence from duty from a C.W.P.No.16237 of 2003 [7]

disciplinary force like Commando Police is a misconduct as has been held by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Jai Singh v. State of Rajasthan, AIR 1966 SC 492. It has further been held that in the absence of any violation of Wednesbury principles as laid down by the Constitution Bench of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Ram Prsshad v. Union of India, 2006(2) SCC, 1, it is not for the Courts to interfere with the quantum of punishment. No such violation of those principles have been convassed or pointed out warranting substitution of the view taken by the disciplinary authorities to that of our own view. Moreover, the petitioner has rendered about 7 years of service, which is full of absence for various period.

In view of the above, the writ fails and the same is dismissed.



July 25, 2006 (M.M.S.BEDI)


Fit for indexing.


Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.