Mohit Kumar Shah, J. – The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 31.8.2008, passed by the Superintendent of Police, Begusarai, whereby and whereunder the petitioner has been inflicted with the punishment of dismissal from service. The petitioner has also prayed for quashing the order dated 16.3.2014, passed by the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Munger Region, Munger, whereby and whereunder the appeal, preferred by the petitioner, has been rejected.

2. The brief facts of the case, according to the petitioner, are that the petitioner had joined on the post of constable with the Bihar Police in the year, 1980, at District-Saharsa, whereafter he had been discharging his duties to the satisfaction of all concerned. Nonetheless, a charge-sheet was served upon the petitioner dated 30.9.2007, stating therein that he was appointed as temporary Constable in the year, 1980, however, thereafter, he had absented himself from duty in an unauthorized manner without permission on 37 occasions, whereafter a departmental proceeding bearing Departmental Proceeding No. 91 of 2007 was initiated against the petitioner and the Enquiry Officer had then submitted the enquiry report, finding him to be guilty of the charges framed against him. Thereafter, a second show cause notice was issued by the Superintendent of Police, Begusarai, vide memo dated 06.06.2008, whereafter again, two show cause notices dated 02.07.2008 and 06.08.2008 were served upon the petitioner and then, the petitioner had filed his reply on 10.08.2008. The petitioner was then dismissed from service by the impugned order dated 31.08.2008, which was challenged by the petitioner, by filing an appeal, however, the same has also been rejected by the impugned order dated 16.03.2014.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the departmental proceeding has been conducted by violating the principles of natural justice and due opportunity has not been granted to the petitioner to put forth his defence. It is also submitted that the punishment, inflicted upon the petitioner, is not commensurate to the charges levelled against him.

4. Per contra, the learned counsel for the State has submitted, by referring to the enquiry report dated 13.04.2008 that after a detailed enquiry, conducted by resorting to the principles of natural justice, the Enquiry Officer has found all the charges proved against the petitioner and he has been found guilty of all the charges. It is also submitted that in the explanation, submitted by the petitioner to the second show cause notice, he has not refuted the allegations levelled against him regarding him being unauthorizedly absent from his duties not only on one occasion, but on, as many as, 37 occasions. It is also submitted that there is no procedural illegality as far as conduct of departmental proceeding qua the petitioner is concerned, hence, the order of dismissal dated 31.8.2008 does not suffer from any infirmity, thus, the present petitioner is fit to be dismissed.

5. I have heard the Ld. counsel for the parties & perused the materials on record. This Court finds that a charge-sheet dt. 30.9.2007 was issued by the Superintendent of Police, Begusarai, to the petitioner, which is reproduced herein below: –

6. A departmental proceeding was initiated against the petitioner with regard to the aforesaid charges, wherein he had participated and then, the Enquiry Officer had submitted his enquiry report dated 13.04.2008, finding all the charges to have been proved as against the petitioner herein, whereafter three show cause notices dated 06.06.2008, 02.07.2008 & 06.08.2008 were issued to the petitioner and finally, he had submitted his reply dated 10.08.2008, but could not refute the charges regarding him being absent in an unauthorized manner on 37 occasions, thus, the Superintendent of Police, Begusarai, had passed the impugned order dated 31.08.2008, considering all the aspects of the matter, inflicting punishme