Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 11036
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Jayesh V. Bhairavia, Judicial Member, Suchitto Kumar Das, Administrative Member
Rosamett Mera orfy – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
O.A. 351/00569/2022/AN
Important Points
Subject
Service Law - Disciplinary Action - Desertion
Act Referred
Constitution of India: Art.14, Art.15, Art.16, Art.21
A & N Police Manual, 1963: R.6.19(a), R.6.19(b), R.19(5), R.19(3)
Police Act: S.29
CCS (Leave) Rules, 1972: R.19(5), R.19(3)
Headnote
(B) Service Law - Disciplinary Proceedings - Personal hearing by appellate authority on mercy appeal post statutory period sufficient - Detailed reasoned order rejecting appeal not cryptic - No requirement for full departmental enquiry where procedure under manual strictly followed - Constitutional articles 14, 15, 16, 21 not violated by adherence to service rules. (Paras 6.6, 6.7)
Facts of the case:
Police constable appointed in 2010, previously declared deserter in 2019 but reinstated leniently, absented from duty w.e.f. 09.12.2020 claiming accident and fracture treated by pediatrician for lumbago. Sent Whatsapp message on 12.01.2021 to superior (denied receipt). Declared deserter on 13.01.2021, confirmed on 10.02.2021 for non-appearance within two months. Appeal dismissed on 24.11.2021 after personal hearing.
Findings of Court:
Actions of authorities strictly as per Police Manual. No legal infirmity in impugned orders. OA devoid of merit and dismissed.
Issues: Whether desertion orders valid under Police Manual; whether WhatsApp message constitutes timely reinstatement application; whether social/tribal background, medical excuse, prior leniency, COVID warrant rule relaxation; adequacy of appellate hearing.
Ratio Decidendi: Strict compliance with Rule 6.19 mandatory - absence over 21 days without leave triggers desertion; two-month window for reinstatement absolute; prior knowledge from earlier desertion precludes ignorance plea; medical leave requires formal sanction application, not mere notification.
Result: OA dismissed.
For the Applicant(s): Ms. A. Nag, Counsel
For the Respondent(s): Dr. D. Chowdhury, Counsel
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual timeline of applicant's appointment, absence, and desertion proceedings. (Para 2) |
| 2. applicant's medical excuse, tribal background, and procedural fairness arguments. (Para 3) |
| 3. police manual rules on desertion and applicant's habitual absenteeism. (Para 4) |
| 4. no legal infirmity; oa dismissed. (Para 7) |
ORDER
Per: Hon’ble Suchitto Kumar Das, Administrative Member
The applicant has approached this Tribunal under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 praying for the following relief:
“a) An order/orders/ direction/ directions quashing the order dated 13.01.2021 passed by the Superintendent of Police, North & Middle Andaman District, Mayabunder whereby the applicant was issued with a notice for declaring her a deserter.
b) An order/orders/ direction/ directions quashing the order dated 10.02.2021 passed by the Superintendent of Police, North & Middle Andaman District, Mayabunder whereby the authorities confirmed the order of desertion.
c) An order/orders/ direction/ directions quashing the order dated 24.11.2021 passed by the Director General of Police whereby Director General of Police dismissed the appeal filed by the applicant which she filed challenging the order dated 10.02.2021.
d) An order directing the respondent authorities to reinstate the applicant into her services.
e) An order directing the respondent authorities to grant all back wages, consequential and monitary benefits to the applicant after reinstate her into service.
f) An order directing the respondent authorities to act in accordance with law.
g) An order to issue directing the respondents to produce the records of the case before this Hon’ble Tribunal so that conscionable justice may be done.
h) Such other or further order direction or directions, as your Lordships deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.”
2. For the sake of clarity, facts in the case are delineated and discussed hereinunder :-
The applicant was appointed as a Police Constable in Andaman & Nicobar Administration vide order dated 15.06.2010. She was posted at Badam Nallah OP in North and Middle Andamans. She absented herself from duty w.e.f. 09.12.2020. The Superintendent of Police, Mayabunder issued an order on 13.01.2021 declaring her a deserter. The order of desertion was confirmed vide order dated 10.02.2021. She made an appeal to the Director General of Police, Andaman and Nicobar Islands vide her representation dated 04.03.2021. She was given a personal hearing by the Director General of Police on 29.06.2021, who after considering her appeal, by a reasoned order dated 24.11.2021, dismissed her appeal and upheld the order dated 10.02.2021 confirming her desertion.
Aggrieved by the rejection of her plea for reinstatement in service, the applicant has filed the instant OA.
3. Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant met with an accident due to which she suffered a fracture and had to undergo medical treatment. It was on 09.12.2020 when she met with the said accident and had to approach a medical specialist for treatment. He advised her to take rest for 20 days. Such condition of the applicant continued. She approached the said medical specialist from time to time. On 29.12.2020, when the applicant approached the doctor he advised her rest for 25 days. The condition of the applicant did not improve and therefore the applicant again approached the doctor on 23.01.2021 who advised her to take rest for another 20 days. On 12.02.2021, she was advised rest for 17 days. After 17 days the applicant recovered and she was declared fit to resume duty from 01.03.2021.
3.1 Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was not in proper condition so as to inform the department about her physical condition immediately when she met with the accident. The applicant belongs to the community of Aboriginal Tribes and such position of the applicant is a disadvantage for her in terms of education and knowledge. Learned Counsel submits that the ci
