In this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, petitioner has called in question the punishment order, whereby petitioner was dismissed from service and also the appellate order, whereby his appeal has been rejected by the appellate authority.

2. Petitioner was served with a charge-sheet Annexure-P/1, wherein it was alleged that petitioner remained unauthorizedly absent from 8-3-2002 to 19-6-2002 (104 days) without intimation and thereby caused dereliction of duties. The second charge against the petitioner was that he is a habitual absentee.

3. In the charge-sheet it is alleged against the petitioner that he was appointed on 24-8-1965 as Constable and till issuance of charge-sheet he was unauthorizedly absent on 47 occasions, which shows that he is a habitual absentee.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner assailed the disciplinary proceedings on following grounds :- (1) The leave were available in the credit of petitioner which could have been sanctioned in terms of Regulation 178 of the Police Regulations. (2) The punishment can be imposed only in accordance with Regulation 226 of the Police Regulations and considering the aforesaid, punishment was extremel