125 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 10.09.2025 Arshad …Appellant Vs.

State of Haryana and others …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHIT KAPOOR Present: Mr. Mohammad Arshad, Advocate for the appellant.

***

ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA, J. (Oral)

1. Vide order impugned in the present appeal, learned Single Judge has refused to interfere with the order of dismissal passed against the appellant by the disciplinary authorities.

2. It transpires that disciplinary action was initiated against the appellant, who was working as a Constable in Haryana Police Force on the charge of unauthorized absence. He had proceeded on one week leave on 12.01.2023 but did not report for joining even after expiry of the leave period. The appellant was placed under suspension on 01.09.2023. An Inquiry Officer was appointed but as the appellant did not participate in the proceedings, the inquiry continued ex parte.

3. Thereafter, show cause notice was issued to the appellant noticing that he had remained absent for more than 40 occasions and was subjected to multiple major and minor punishments.

4. Before the learned Single Judge the argument was that the spirit of Rule 16.2 of the Punjab Police Rules, 1934, stands violated on account of dismissal order passed against the appellant.

5. Learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition after noticing the facts of the case according to which the appellant had remained absent on 42 occasions during his short service period of 12 years. Four major punishments and penalty of stoppage of nineteen increments with permanent effect, has already been awarded to the appellant. The factual aspects noticed by the learned Single Judge in Paras No.4 to 6 are reproduced herein after:-

“4. The petitioner concededly remained absent from duty for more than 300 days which compelled the authorities to pass order of dismissal from service. The Disciplinary Authority as well as Appellate Authority has considered past conduct of the petitioner. The Disciplinary Authority in the show cause notice itself has underscored past conduct of petitioner. It was noticed that he remained absent on 42 occasions during his short service of 12 years. The Appellate as well as Revisionary Authority also considered past conduct of the petitioner. It was noticed that he was awarded four major punishments and his 19 increments with permanent effect were forfeited during short span of 12 years service. The operative portion of order dated 16.10.2024 passed by the Appellate Authority reads as:-

“5. I have examined the appeal of the appellant, relevant departmental enquiry file & other relevant record and found that the departmental enquiry has been conducted as per procedure. There are sufficient incriminating evidences on file/record which proves the allegations levelled against him. It is evident from the record placed on file that the appellant deliberately did not join the departmental proceedings, even after asked to join a number of times by the Enquiry Officer in writing, which forced/compelled the Enquiry officer to get the orders of Ex. party proceedings for departmental enquiry, from the Punishing authority. Furthermore, the examination of medical documents revealed that medical documents produced by the appellant are photocopies of original documents (having alteration in date). Some of the documents belong to the treatment of evil soul/black magic by a Tantrik (exorcist). The appellant was recruited in police department in the year 2012. Out of 12 years of service he has remained absent (42 times) from duty for almost 6 years which speaks the kind of discipline he maintains in a disciplined force. Hence, I did not find any merit in the appeal of the appellant and the same is hereby rejected.

6. The appeal is disposed off accordingly. An entry be made in the character roll of the appellant and also in the HRMS data base. A copy of the order be supplied to the appel