Patna High Court
Subodh Kumar vs The Union Of India on 2 February, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.1646 of 2019
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4780 of 2016
======================================================
Subodh Kumar, S/o Sri Krishanand Singh @ Krishanandan Singh, R/o
Village- Naudiha Saidpur, P.O.- Rahimpur, P.S. Sonpur, District- Saran.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The Union of India through the Secretary, Home Department, Union of
India, New Delhi.
2. The D.G. of Police, SSB, CGO Complex, North Block, Lodhi Road, New
Delhi.
3. The I.G. of Police, Frontier Hqurs SSB, Patna.
4. The D.I.G. Sector Hqurs SSB, Muzaffarpur.
5. The Commandant SSB, 20th Bn, Sitamarhi.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Gajendra Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Awadhesh Kumar Pandey, SCGC
Mr. Ravinder Kumar Sharma, CGC.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA)
Date : 02-02-2023
Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned
counsel for the respondents.
2. The present L.P.A. is directed against the judgment
dated 14.11.2019 passed in CWJC No. 4780 of 2016 by the
learned Single Judge of this Court whereby and whereunder the
civil writ petition filed by the appellant has been dismissed.
3. In the writ petition, the appellant-petitioner has
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1646 of 2019 dt.02-02-2023
sought following relief :
"For issuance of appropriate writ, order or
direction to the respondents to set aside order of
dismissal passed by the Commandant, 20th Bn.
SSB, Sitamarhi (Annexure-6), to set aside order of
D.I.G., SSB Sector Hqurs, Muzaffarpur, to set
aside order of Inspector General, Frontier Hqurs,
SSB, Patna and to set aside order of D.G., SSB, N.
Delhi if adverse to the petitioner and for grant of
all consequential benefits".
4. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant had been
working as Constable (GD) in Sashatra Seema Bal ('SSB' in short)
and proceeded on 45 days earned leave w.e.f.16.05.2011 to
29.06.2011 and failed to resume his duty on expiry of sanctioned
leave. He was issued several re-joining notices vide memo dated
04.07.2011 and memo dated 15.07.2011 at his permanent address
with direction to resume his duty but he did not resume his duty
and absented himself without proper leave/permission from the
competent authority. Thereafter, a Court of Inquiry was ordered
vide Office Order dated 23.08 2011 and conducted by Sri
Maheshwar Prasad, Deputy Commandant to inquire into what
circumstances CT/GD Subodh Kumar (appellant herein) absented
himself after his sanctioned 45 days Earned Leave. The Inquiry
Officer submitted his inquiry report and gave his opinion that Ex.
CT/GD Subodh Kumar had overstayed from leave without
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1646 of 2019 dt.02-02-2023
sufficient cause w.e.f. 29.06.2011 and did not respond/resume his
duty in spite of several re-joining notices. Hence, inquiry officer
recommended for declaring him as "Deserter" from the Force.
Accordingly Commandant, 20th Bn SSB, Sitamarhi declared him
"Deserter" from the Force under Section 74 of SSB Act, 2007 and
issued a Show Cause Notice vide memo dated 20.02.2012 to Ex.
CT/GD Subodh Kumar and proposed to terminate his services
while providing an opportunity for making representation within
30 days from the receipt of show cause notice, but no response
was received from the appellant. Subsequently, the appellant was
removed from service vide Office Order No. E-III/PF/CRC
0591685/ CT(GD)/SK/4726-38 dated 19.04.2012. Being aggrieved
by the aforesaid order of removal from service, the appellant
preferred an appeal on 19.06.2012 before the Deputy Inspector
General, SHQ, SSB, Muzaffarpur for reviewing his removal from
Service. The appellate authority has rejected the appeal vide memo
dated 27.09.2012. Thereafter, the appellant preferred the 2 nd
appeal on 23.01.2015 and on 31.01.2015 before the Inspector
General, Frontier Hqrs SSB, Patna. The appellate authority also
rejected the 2nd appeal of the appellant vide order dated
27.05.2015. The appellant again preferred memorial before the
Director General, FHQ, SSB, New Delhi and when no order was
passed on the memorial of the appellant, the petitioner (appellant
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1646 of 2019 dt.02-02-2023
herein) preferred CWJC No.4780 of 2016. The learned Single
Judge dismissed the appellant's writ petition. Hence, the present
L.P.A.
5. The learned counsel for the appellant has submitted
that the order of removal is unsustainable on the ground that a
copy of enquiry report was not served on the appellant and the
punishment of dismissal is grossly disproportionate to the
allegation.
6. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondents has
submitted that no interference in the impugned judgment of
learned Single Judge is called for as the same has been passed
after duly considering all the materials on record. There is no
irregularity in the procedure adopted in the departmental
proceeding or there is no violation of principles of natural
justice.
7. Having considered the material available on record and
further considering the rival submission, it appears that the
appellant proceeded on 45 days earned leave w.e.f.16.05.2011 to
29.06.2011 and failed to resume his duty on expiry of sanctioned
leave. He was issued several re-joining notices with direction to
resume his duty but he did not resume his duty and absented
himself without proper leave/permission from the competent
authority. The Inquiry Officer submitted his inquiry report and
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1646 of 2019 dt.02-02-2023
given opinion that the appellant had overstayed from leave without
sufficient cause w.e.f. 29.06.2011 and did not respond/resume his
duty in spite of several re-joining notices. Hence, inquiry officer
recommended for declaring him as "Deserter" from the Force.
Accordingly Commandant declared him "Deserter" from the Force
and issued a show cause notice to the appellant and proposed to
terminate his services while providing an opportunity for making
representation within 30 days from the receipt of show cause
notice, but no response was received from the appellant.
Subsequently, the appellant was removed from service vide Office
Order dated 19.04.2012.
8. It further appears that the appellant chose not to
participate in the enquiry after repeated notices, The appellant
further chose not to explain his unauthorized absence or his
conduct ever, therefore, it cannot be said that he was not served
with a copy of enquiry report or that punishment was
disproportionate. Unauthorized absence (or overstaying leave), is
in itself an act of indiscipline. SSB is one of the disciplined
organizations. Employee of such organization must maintain
discipline while obeying orders of the superior officer.
Remaining on unauthorized absence and it is not supported by
any material information. The appellant has also not participated
in the inquiry and there are no proper explanation to take note of
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1646 of 2019 dt.02-02-2023
his absence in the inquiry.
9. In the light of discussion made hereinabove and
under the facts and circumstances of the case, it cannot be said
that the learned Single Judge has committed any error which
calls for interference by this Court in exercise of the appellate
jurisdiction. We are in agreement with the view taken by the
learned Single Judge.
10. Accordingly, the present Letters Patent Appeal is
dismissed.
(P. B. Bajanthri, J)
( Arun Kumar Jha, J)
V.K.Pandey/-
AFR/NAFR N.A.F.R.
CAV DATE N.A.
Uploading Date 08.02.2023
Transmission Date N.A.
