Manojit Bhuyan, J.:--

Heard Mr. T. Tapak, learned counsel for the appellant as well as Ms. G. Deka, learned counsel representing all the official respondents.

2. At the relevant time, the petitioner was employed as a Constable under the 1st IRBN, BHQ Namsftng Mukh, Deomali, in the district of Tirap, Arunachal Pradesh. An inquiry against the petitioner was proposed to be held under rule 7 of the of the Arunachal Pradesh Police (Disciplinary and Appeal) Rules, 1999 on the following 2(two) charges.

"ARTICLE-I

That Ct. Tingkhap Tingkhatra of 1st IRBn while detailed for law and order duty at Diyun was found absent from his duty place w.e.f. 18.1.2005 to 9.7.2005 without any intimation/permission from the competent authority. This the charge.

ARTICLE-II

That on 10.7.2005 (the date of suspension) the OC PS Kanubari got information from his source that Ct. Tingkhap Tingkhatra of 1st IRBn who was unauthorisedly absenting is involved in illegal trade of opium and ganja in and around Kanubari area. Relying on the report, OC Kanubari PS launched a search operation with the held of ITBP. During the operation at about 1330 hrs. the OC Kanubari PS recovered 30 grams of opium and 5 packets of ganja from the possession of Ct. Tingkhap Tingkhatra on 10.7.05 and arrested. Thus, the charge."

3. To this end, a Memorandum was duly issued under the hand of the Commandant, 1st IRBN, BHQ, Namsangmukh. An Inquiry Officer was appointed to enquire into the charges framed against the petitioner, pursuant to which proceedings were initiated affording opportunity to the petitioner of being heard in his defence. Upon inspection to documents and recording of statements of witnesses, a Report was submitted to the Disciplinary Authority in which the charges famed against the petitioner were found to be proved.

4. On 10.7.2006, a notice was marked to the petitioner providing an opportunity to him to make representation against the proposed punishment of dismissal from service. A copy of the inquiry report was also made over to the petitioner. No representation, whatsoever, was made as against the proposed punishment and eventually by an order dated 7.8.2006, the penalty of dismissal from service was confirmed in exercise of power under sub-rule (2) (a) of rule 3 of the APP (D&A) Rules, 1999. As per the said order, the name of the petitioner was directed to be struck off from the roll of the 1st IRBn. The period of absence from duty w.e.f. 18.1.2005 to 9.7.2005 was treated as Extraordinary Leave and the period of suspension w.e.f 10.7.2005 to 25.1.2006 and from 5.3.2006 to 7.8.2006 was treated be as leave of kind due and the unauthorized absence while under suspension w.e.f. 26.1.2006 to 4.3.2006 was treated as dies non.

5. The petitioner preferred an appeal before the Deputy Inspector of Police, Government of Arunachal Pradesh, on 18.1.2007 and the grounds of appeal were as follows :

"A. For that the Commandant, 1st IRBN PHQ, Namsangmukh acted illegally and failed to consider the case of the appellant while passing impugned major punishment order 7.8.2006 inasmuch as there is no wilful absent from duty and as such the impugned major punishment order is liable to be set aside and reconsidered keeping the view that the livelihood of the appellant.

B. For that the Commandant, 1st IRBN PHQ, Namsangmukh, acted illegally and in gross violation of the principle of natural justice in passing the impugned order dated 7.8.2006 and without considering the livelihood of tire appellant and his family members and as such same are liable to set aside and reconsidered.

C. For that the appellant-petitioner has not received any notice or corresponding made to him after giving his statement before the Inquiry Officer and as such the appellant has not been given an opportunity of being heard to have his say. Therefore, the impugned major punishment order dated 7.8.2006 liable to be set aside and reconsidered/modified.

D. For that the Commandant, 1st IRBN PHQ, Namsangmukh in arbitrary manner and

Click Here to Read the rest of this document