LPA No.77 of 2008(O&M) -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CASE NO.: LPA No.77 of 2008(O&M)
DATE OF DECISION: March 30, 2009
BABU RAM ...APPELLANT
VERSUS
THE STATE OF HARYANA ...RESPONDENT
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMA NATH SINGH.
PRESENT: MR.BRIJENDER KAUSHIK, ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT.
ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J.
C.M. No.304 of 2008
There is a delay of 8 days in refiling the present appeal.
For the reasons mentioned in the application, the delay is
condoned.
C.M. No.305 of 2008
There is a delay of 6 days in filing the present appeal.
For the reasons mentioned in the application, the delay is
condoned.
LPA No.77 of 2008
The challenge in this Letters Patent Appeal is to the judgement
passed by the learned Single Judge dated 10.10.2007, vide which the orders
of dismissal from service passed against the appellant have been upheld.
Briefly the facts of the case are that on 1/2.9.1981, the appellant
was posted as Judicial Guard at Jagadhari. The nature of duties was to keep
LPA No.77 of 2008(O&M) -2-
a strict guard on the undertrials who are confined. On the aforesaid date a
checking was done by Dharam Singh, DSP who reported that the appellant
was under the influence of liquor. He reported the matter to the
Superintendent of Police who placed the appellant under suspension w.e.f.
2.9.1981 and he was ordered to be dealt with departmentally. The appellant
was reinstated w.e.f. 21.10.1981, subject to final outcome of the
departmental enquiry against him. The appellant was proceeded against
departmentally and the enquiry officer after recording the statements of Dr.
R.K. Jain, M.O. Civil Hospital, Jagadhari, Dharam Singh, DSP and other
witnesses held that the appellant was under the influence of liquor. On the
basis of report, the appellant was issued a show cause notice by the
Superintendent of Police, Ambala as to why penalty of dismissal from
service be not inflicted upon him. The appellant also led evidence in
support of his case. However, the same was not accepted and he was
ordered to be dismissed from service vide order dated 15.9.1982, passed by
the Superintendent of Police, Ambala. The appeal filed by the appellant
was dismissed by the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Ambala Range,
Ambala Cantt. vide order dated 23.3.1983 and the revision-cum-mercy
petition filed by the appellant was also dismissed by the Director General of
Police, Haryana on dated 18.5.1984. These orders were challenged by the
appellant by filing CWP No.4673 of 1984 which has also been dismissed by
the learned Single Judge.
Counsel for the appellant has submitted that even if the
appellant had consumed liquor, the same cannot be treated to be a grave
misconduct so as to warrant dismissal from service. It is contended by the
learned counsel that the appellant had served for approximately 10 years,
LPA No.77 of 2008(O&M) -3-
therefore, he could have been burdened with a lesser punishment.
We have heard the counsel for the appellant. The appellant was
assigned the duty of standing Judicial Guard which is a very important
Guard duty as he has to oversee the undertrials who are confined in jail. He
has to also ensure that no undertrial escapes. It has been established in the
enquiry report that the appellant was intoxicated and was under the
influence of liquor on the intervening night of 1/2.9.1981. The Doctor and
other witnesses who deposed against the petitioner before the enquiry
officer have stated that the appellant was under the influence of liquor. The
appellant being a member of disciplined force was required to remain alert
and was also required to remain present specially during night time. This
act of the appellant obviously constitutes grave misconduct which stands
established.
In view of the above, we find no ground to impose any lesser
punishment on the appellant and accordingly this Letters Patent Appeal is
dismissed.
(ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA)
JUDGE
March 30, 2009 (UMA NATH SINGH)
Gulati JUDGE