Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

13. The applicant immediately after receipt of this order preferred an appeal stating this factual position to the appellate authority and pressed upon para 11 of his appeal Item No. 12 (C-III) O.A. No. 2595/2021 (annexed at page 88 of the OA). The same is reproduced as under :-

"11. That from the perusal of the Punishment Order of the Punishing Authority issued vide order No. 244-60/HAP/P- I/1st Bn. DAP dated 14.01.2016 in para 8 and 10 it has been wrongly mentioned by the Punishing Authority that the Appellant was remained in JC w.e.f. 11.08.2014 to 26.08.2014 whereas the appellant had surrendered himself on 11.08.2014 in the court of Session Judge, Muzaffar Nagar, U.P. vide Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 3067/2014 and was granted Interim Bail on 11.08.14 and on the main application for bail was kept for record till 26.08.14. Copy of Court's order dt. 11-8-14 is enclosed for your kind information. On 26-08-14 I was granted permanent/regular Bail but from the Hon'ble Court on 26- 8-14, copy of Court's order is enclosed for your kind information. Hence I did not remain in JC during the period from 11-8-14 to 26-8-14, therefore, the allegations are false and the too harsh server punishment awarded to me may kindly be quashed and set aside. Moreover the appellant while remained posted in Special Staff North- East Distt, had performed his duties in PS Seema Puri and on the date of incident I was present in PS Seema Puri, copy of the Chitha is enclosed for your kind information which could prove that one person cannot remain present at two placed on the same date and time and hence the entire story is false and baseless against me."