Loading...
Responsive image

Pankajakshan vs Commandant on 28 October, 2009

Kerala High Court
Pankajakshan vs Commandant on 28 October, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 30558 of 2009(L)


1. PANKAJAKSHAN,NO.830752766 HC/GD/51BN/
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. COMMANDANT,51,BATTALLION,CRPF,
                       ...       Respondent

2. UNION OF INDIA,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.L.G.SURESH BABU

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :28/10/2009

 O R D E R
                        ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
               --------------------------------------------------
                  W.P.(C) NO.30558 OF 2009 (L)
               --------------------------------------------------
            Dated this the 28th day of October, 2009

                            J U D G M E N T

Petitioner was a Head Constable in the CRPF. While working at

Gujarat, disciplinary action was initiated against him by Ext.P1. After

completing the proceedings he was removed from service by Ext.P2

order dated 26.3.2003. It is challenging Ext.P2 that this writ petition

is filed.

2. First of all, the writ petition is highly belated and there is

absolutely no explanation forthcoming justifying the delay. Further,

proceedings were initiated and completed at the time when the

petitioner was working at Gujarat. If that be so, the petitioner ought

to have sought his remedies in the Court within whose jurisdiction

the cause of action has arisen.

3. Even apart from all this, a reading of Ext.P1 charges show

that the petitioner had consumed alcohol while on duty and that too

while at Gujarat where prohibition is in force. He is also alleged to

have refused to follow lawful orders and neglected duty at the place

of his work. These misconducts have been proved and charges

WPC.No.30558 /09
:2 :

itself reveal that punishments have been imposed on the petitioner

on five previous occasions.

4. In these circumstances, having regard to the fact that the

misconducts were proved against the petitioner I cannot find fault

with the authorities in having removed the petitioner from service.

Writ petition fails and is dismissed.

(ANTONY DOMINIC)
JUDGE
vi/

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. More Information