SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(MP) 3878

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Ajay Singh Verma – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
WA 261/2024



Advocates:
Mahendra Pateriya,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA &

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRADEEP MITTAL

th

ON THE 20 OF FEBRUARY, 2026 WRIT APPEAL No. 261 of 2024 AJAY SINGH VERMA Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Appearance:

Shri Mahendra Pateriya & Shri Vishal Pateriya - Advocates for the petitioner.

Shri Ritwik Parashar - Government Advocate for the respondent/State.

Reserved on: 06.2.2026 Pronounced on: 20.02.2026 ------------------------------------------------------------------------

ORDER Per: Justice Vivek Rusia The appellant has filed this Writ Appeal under section 2(1) of Madhya Pradesh Uchchaya Nyaylaya (Khand Nyaypeeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005, against the order dated 13.7.2023 passed by the writ court, by which the writ Court has dismissed the Writ Petition No.9910/2017 filed by the appellant against the order of his termination from service, as also against the order of dismissal of the appeal.

2. Facts of the writ appeal, in a nutshell, are as follows:-

The appellant was initially appointed as a Constable on 19.04.1999, and later in 2014, he was promoted to Head Constable. He was posted in Chowki Pandiwada, Police Station Bamhni since 07.03.2014. On 23.09.2014 at about 6.00 A.M, all of a sudden his health condition became serious therefore, he requested the In-Charge of Police Chowki Pandiwada to permit him to go to the hospital, who, looking at his serious condition, granted him 8 hours’ permission to get himself checked up. Accordingly, ‘Ravangi’ of the appellant was shown at 06.10 Hrs. on 23.09.2014 in Roznamcha Sanha No.427 to go to hospital. This fact is mentioned in the preliminary enquiry report contained in the letter of the Station House Officer, Police Station Tikariya District Mandla dated 18.01.2016. In the meantime, the Superintendent of Police, Mandla issued a transfer Order No.Pua/Man/Steno/534/2014 dated 22/09/2014, whereby the appellant was transferred from Police Chowki, Pandiwada Police Station, Bamhni to Police Station Niwas. This transfer order dated 22/09/2014 showed the appellant’s Ravangi from Pandiwada at 16.10 Hrs. behind the back of the appellant vide Roznamacha Sanha No.439 for submitting his joining in Police Station Niwas, ignoring the very important fact that the appellant had not returned on duty and had not submitted his “Aamad” at Police Chowki Pandiwada, his Ravangi cannot be shown. The appellant’s ailment continued from 23.09.2014 to 08.04.2015. On 09.04.2015 at 11.00 AM, he submitted his joining along with all medical documents, which were recorded in ‘Roznamcha Sanha’ No.316 dated and at the time of joining, 3. The matter relating to the alleged unauthorised absence of the appellant from 22.09.2014 to 09.04.2015 without any intimation was sent to the Superintendent of Police Mandla vide letter No.436/16 dated 09.03.2016. Again, on 21.12.2015 at 17.24 Hrs. the Appellant proceeded on 3 days’ casual leave and his 'Ravangi' was shown in 'Roznamcha Sanha' No.16 dated 21.12.2015 (Ex.P-4), but he did not return after availing 3 days casual leave. Therefore, he was marked absent, and on 26.12.2015 at 10.10 AM, he was shown absent on casual leave vide Roznamcha Sanha No.007 dated 26.12.2015 (Ex.P-5). Thus, it is alleged that from 26.12.2015, the appellant continuously remained absent from duty. Therefore, the Superintendent of Police, Mandla, issued an order dated 26.12.2015 for initiating a preliminary enquiry, whereupon the In-charge Police Station, Tikariya, submitted a preliminary inquiry report vide letter dated 18.01.2016. The Superintendent of Police, Mandla issued charge-sheet dated 06.04.2016. The appellant submitted his reply to the charge sheet, which was not found to be satisfactory. Therefore, departmental enquiry was initiated, and by the impugned order dated 10.08.2016, the appellant was punished with termination from service and the period of leav

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top