Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Tilak Raj vs Union Of India And Others on 1 April, 2014

Author: Daya Chaudhary

Bench: Daya Chaudhary

            CWP No.242 of 2011                                                         1

                               IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                                          AT CHANDIGARH.

                                                      CWP No.242 of 2011
                                                      Date of Decision: 01.04.2014


            Tilak Raj                                                 ....Petitioner

                               Versus

            Union of India and others                                ....Respondents


            BEFORE :- HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY

            Present:-          Mr. Rajeev Anand, Advocate
                               for the petitioner.

                               Mr. Sanjay Joshi, Advocate
                               for the respondents-Union of India.

                                           *****

            DAYA CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL)

The case of the petitioner, in the present petition, is that he was initially appointed as Head Constable/Radio Operator on 01.01.1997 in the respondent-department and on completion of his basic training on 13.11.1998, he was posted to extreme hard area, extreme cold climate and High Altitude Area at Leh Ladakh from November 1998 to 2001 for the period of more than three years which was also extended thereafter.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that because of such like posting, the petitioner suffered ailment of seizures which was reported on 13.05.2002 and he was placed under treatment for said ailment. As per Medical Board proceedings, the petitioner was ordered to be boarded out of service for the ailment namely, Alcohol Dependence Syndrome and thereafter, he was issued a show cause notice on 23.10.2007 for termination of his services on medical grounds. Learned counsel also submits that the petitioner got himself examined from Regional Hospital, Hamirpar, wherein, it was observed that that is no Kaur Gurpreet 2014.04.03 13:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh CWP No.242 of 2011 2 evidence of alcohol dependence and however, he is a case of alcohol abuse. Accordingly, the certificate in this regard was presented before the authorities concerned on 23.11.2007 when he joined his duties after availing leave but he was discharged from service on the same very day i.e 23.11.2007. Thereafter, he filed an appeal on 31.01.2008. As it was not presented before the competent authority on 08.02.2009, the appeal was filed before the competent authority but no action has been taken thereupon so far and the same is still pending.

Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the petitioner was habitual offender as various punishments have been awarded to him during his service i.e (a) Reprimand in the year 09/2002, for stealing money. (b) severe reprimand in the year 01/2004 for consuming alcohol on duty hours (c) warning letter issued vide Memo No.14 dated 31.01.2007 for taking alcohol from civil wine shop without making any payment.

Learned counsel for the respondents also submits that the appeal was not filed by the petitioner in time as provided to him and subsequently, the same was filed before the authority, who was not competent and thereafter, another appeal was filed. There was no sanction of extended leave period of seven days and hence, the petitioner overstayed his leave.

Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the impugned order as well as other documents on the file.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued on merit and certain objections have been raised by learned counsel for the respondents-Union of India as well.

Without commenting anything on the merit of the case and Kaur Gurpreet 2014.04.03 13:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh CWP No.242 of 2011 3 because of the reason that the appeal filed by the petitioner is still pending as no decision has been taken thereupon so far, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 to decide the appeal filed by the petitioner within a period of four months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

However, in case, the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner in the appeal are found to be in favour of the petitioner, the necessary order be passed and relief be granted to the petitioner within a period of one month thereafter.

(DAYA CHAUDHARY) 01.04.2014 JUDGE gurpreet Kaur Gurpreet 2014.04.03 13:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh