Disciplinary punishment must be proportionate to the offense, and dismissal for unauthorized absence is excessive compared to lesser disciplinary actions.

ORDER :

1. This Writ Petition has been filed praying to quash the order passed by the 3rd respondent in Rc. No A4 / PR No.19 / 2021 dated 23.09.2021 and the consequent order passed by the 2nd Respondent in C.No C1/Appeal - 24 / 2021 dated 29.10.2021 and the consequent order passed by the 1st Respondent in Rc. No 009932/ AP. 3 (1) / 2021 dated 23.04.2022 and consequently to direct the Respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service with all continuation, service benefits and monetary benefits to the petitioner.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was recruited as Grade-II Police Constable on 27.01.2013 and he was discharging unblemished duty as dutiful police officer. While he was in duty in Poonamallee Battalion TANGO-12, the petitioner’s child was affected with jaundice and he could not report for duty on 13.04.2021. At the relevant point of time, there was second wave of covid pandemic. He also suffered with ill health, thereby the third respondent passed a preliminary order on 03.05.2021 and treated the petitioner as deserter and further directed the petitioner to appear before the third respondent on or before 11.06.2021. On receipt of the same, the petitioner appeared before the third respondent on 19.05.2021 and offered his explanation. The third respondent accepted the explanation and allowed the petitioner to join duty. Thereafter, disciplinary proceedings was initiated by issuing charge memo in PR.No.19/2021 under Rule 3(b) of Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate Service(Discipline & Appeal) Rules on 19.07.2021 and thereafter the fourth respondent was appointed as enquiry officer and the enquiry officer made a minute. Based on the proven minute, the petitioner made further representation. However, the third respondent imposed punishment of removal from service. Aggrieved by the third respondent punishment, the petitioner preferred appeal before the second respondent on 29.09.2021. However, without affording opportunity to the petitioner, the second respondent confirmed the order passed by the third respondent. Again, the petitioner preferred mercy petition before the first respondent. The first respondent dismissed the same on 23.04.2022. Challenging the concurrent findings rendered by the original authority, appellate authority and revisional authority, this writ petition has been filed.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would further submit that it is true earlier to this punishment, the petitioner suffered five punishments in similar nature. However, the petitioner is aged about 34 years and sending the petitioner from service will affect the petitioner’s familiy and the petitioner has not involved in any criminal case, misconduct or insubordination. It is only unauthorised absence without leave application. However, the punishment of dismissal from service is disproportionate. Accordingly, he prayed for appropriate orders.

4. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submitted that the Petitioner herein was enlisted as Police Constable Grade II on 18.02.2013. After completion of 7 months institutional training, the Petitioner herein was posted to Tamil Nadu Special Police 8th Battalion, New Delhi and later on transfer he was received in Tamil Nadu Special Police 13th Battalion, Poonamallee on 23.07.2019. While serving in the 13th Battalion, the Petitioner herein deployed for TANGO-12 duty, he unauthorized absent for duty from 13.04.2021 and not reported for duty for more than 21 days. As per Police Standing Order 95(1), deserter order issued to the petitioner in Battalion