Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
SANDEEP MOUDGIL
Vivek Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J.
Prayer
1. The jurisdiction of this court has been invoked under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction for calling the records of the proceedings before the respondents and for quashing the order dated 15.12.2018 passed by Respondent No. 3 (Annexure P-1), whereby the petitioner was declared a proclaimed person (absconder), as well as the order dated 25.04.2019 (Annexure P-2) passed by Respondent No. 3, whereby the petitioner has been dismissed from service. The petitioner further seeks issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to reinstate the petitioner in service with all consequential and attendant benefits.
Brief Facts
2. The petitioner was enrolled in the Central Reserve Police Force on 01.11.2006 and was serving as Constable (CT/WC). He was posted to E/44 Battalion on 16.02.2016 and continued to serve in the said unit. The petitioner proceeded on sanctioned leave for 15 days from 19.05.2018 to 05.06.2018. Upon expiry of the leave, he was required to report for duty on 05.06.2018 at the Transit Camp, Jammu. However, due
The punishment of dismissal was disproportionate to the offence of unauthorized absence from duty.
Disciplinary proceedings must adhere to principles of natural justice, and penalties require clear justification; absence without leave does not equate to desertion without intent to abandon service.
Proportionality of punishment and adherence to prescribed procedures in disciplinary proceedings.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
