-1-
BEFORE THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF
MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE
W.P. NO. /2019
(Service Matter / SB)
PETITIONER .. Abharam S/o. Satyanarayan Yadav
V/s
RESPONDENTS .. State of Madhya Pradesh and others
INDEX
S.
Particulars Orig/Copy Annexure Page No
No.
1 Chronology of Dates & Events
2 Writ Petition Orig
3 Affidavit Orig
4 List of Documents Orig
5 Roznamcha Sanha dt. 27/01/2018 Copy P/1
6 Form No. 3 Copy P/2
7 Form No. 4 Copy P/3
8 Medical Certificates Copy P/4
9 Roznamcha Sanha dt. 30/03/2016 Copy P/5
10 Notice dt. 01/04/2016 Copy P/6
11 Enquiry report Copy P/7
12 Statement of the petitioner Copy P/8
13 Charge sheet Copy P/9
14 Reply filed by petitioner Copy P/10
Statements recorded by enquiry
15 Copy P/11
officer
Brief note submitted by
16 Copy P/12
presenting officer
Brief note submitted by
17 Copy P/13
petitioner
18 Enquiry Report dt. 11/01/2017 Copy P/14
-2-
S.
Particulars Orig/Copy Annexure Page No
No.
2nd Show Cause Notice dt.
19 Copy P/15
19/01/2017
20 Reply by petitioner Copy P/16
21 Punishment/termination Order Copy P/17
22 Order dt. 30/06/2017 Copy P/18
23 Letter dt. 04/01/2018 Copy P/19
24 Vakalatnama Orig
Indore Submitted by:
Dated :
COUNSEL FOR PETITIONER
(ASHUTOSH NIMGAONKAR)
-3-
BEFORE THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF
MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE
W.P. NO. /2019
(Service Matter / SB)
PETITIONER .. Abharam S/o. Satyanarayan Yadav
V/s
RESPONDENTS .. State of Madhya Pradesh and others
CHROLONOGY OF DATES AND EVENTS
Date Event
Petitioner suffered severe illness and therefore admitted to
Choithram Hospital Indore due to which petitioner could not
27/01/2016
submit written application as a result of the aforesaid petitioner
absence was reported in Roznamcha Sanha.
After recovering from his heart ailment petitioner reported on
29/03/2016 duty and submitted is medical certificates in Form No. 3 and 4
alongwith details of hospitalization.
30/03/2016 Petitioners presence was marked in Roznamcha Sanha.
Petitioner was served with a show cause notice directing him to
01/04/2016 join on duties immediately and was also directed to submit his
explanation for the unauthorized absence from duties.
A preliminary enquiry was conducted by respondents and after
24/05/2016 recording statement of the petitioner and other employees report
was submitted by an inspector.
Reply filed by the petitioner to the charge sheet served directing
27/08/2016 departmental enquiry against petitioner without taking any
reply.
Enquiry officer submitted its enquiry report wherein the
petitioner was held guilty of unauthorized absence of 63 days.
11/01/2017
Petitioner submitted his representation in reply to the aforesaid
notice.
Respondent no.3 vide its order passed an order of punishment
28/02/2017
against the petitioner terminating him from his services.
Petitioner preferred departmental appeal to the Deputy Inspector
30/06/2017
of Police which had also been dismissed.
-4-
Date Event
Application made under the Right to Information Act for the
04/01/2018
want of dismissal order of appeal filed by petitioner
Indore Submitted by:
Dated :
COUNSEL FOR PETITIONER
(ASHUTOSH NIMGAONKAR)
-5-
BEFORE THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF
MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE
W.P. NO. /2019
(Service Matter / SB)
PETITIONER .. 1. Abharam Yadav S/o. Satyanarayan Yadav
Age : Adult, Occupation :
R/o. : 54, Teli Kheda, Mhow
Dist. Indore (M.P.)
V/s
RESPONDENTS .. 1. State of Madhya Pradesh
through Principal Secretary
Ministry of Home Affairs Department
Mantralaya Vallabh Bhawan, Bhopal (M.P.)
2. Deputy Inspector General of Police
Indore (City)
H.O. Rani Saray Regal Square, Indore (M.P.)
3. Superintendent of Police
Indore District Indore
H.O. Rani Saray Regal Square, Indore (M.P.)
WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA
IN THE MATTER OF ILLEGAL TERMINATION OF SERVICE
MAY IT PLEASE YOUR LORDSHIPS
The petitioner above named humbly submits as under :
1. PARTICULARS OF THE CAUSE/ORDER AGAINST WHICH
THE PETITION IS MADE :
(1) Date of order : 28/02/2017 and 30/06/2017
(2) Order no. : 1-
Øekad@iqv@eq[;k@bUnkSJ@ih,@fo-
tkap&¼13@16½@226&lh@16&17
2-
Øekad@mekfu@ba@ful@vihy@,Q&13
-6-
@575@26041&1&ch@17
(3) Passed by : Respondent no. 2 and 3
(4) Subject matter in brief :
The petitioner has filed the present petition challenging the
Order dt. 28/02/2017 Annexure P/17 and 30/06/2017 Annexure
P/19 passed by respondents no. 2 and 3 whereby the services of
the petitioner have been terminated from the post of Heat
Constable only on the ground of absence from duty for a period
of 63 days ignoring the fact that the petitioner had suffered
heart attack and was admitted in the hospital for his treatment.
The petitioner has submitted medical certificates as well as
treatment papers to the respondents after reporting to duty but
the same have been ignored and petitioner has been illegally
and arbitrarily terminated from his service. The petitioner has
not been paid his salary and suspension allowance. Hence this
petition.
2. DECLARATION
The petitioner declares that it has not filed any other petition before
any Court, Authority or Tribunal and no such proceeding is pending
with respect to the matter of the present petition.
3. DETAILS OF REMEDIES EXHAUSTED:
The petitioner declare that he has no other alternate or efficacious
remedy other than filing this petition for claiming the reliefs prayed
for in this petition.
4. DELAY, IF ANY, IN FILING THE PETITION AND
EXPLANATION THEREOF:
The petitioner submits that there is no delay in filing this writ petition.
-7-
5. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE:
5.1 That, the petitioner was appointed on the post of constable in
the year 1986 in Police Department and was promoted to the
post of Head Constable in the year 2014. The petitioner has
been given 107 prizes in his entire service tenure which
indicates that his service record was unblemished. However
petitioner was issued warning for remaining absent from duty.
5.2 That, at the relevant point of time in the year 2016 petitioner
was posted at Indore when on 27/01/2016 the petitioner
suffered severe illness and therefore was admitted to Choithram
Hospital Indore and was further treated at Civil Hospital Mhow.
The information about petitioner illness was informed by his
wife on telephone on office as due to petitioner severe illness
written application could not be submitted. As a result of the
aforesaid petitioner absence was reported in the Roznamcha
Sanha on 27/01/2018. A copy of the entry in Roznamcha Sanha
is enclosed herewith as ANNEXURE P/1.
5.3 That, after recovering from his heart ailment the petitioner
reported on duty on 29/03/2016 and submitted his medical
certificates in Form no. 3 and 4 alongwith details of
hospitalization and with the permission of his higher officials
he was permitted to report on duty. Accordingly his presence
was marked in the Roznamcha Sanha on 30/03/2016. Copies of
the certificates and Roznamcha dt. 30/03/2016 are enclosed
herewith as ANNEXURE P/2 TO P/5.
5.4 That, on 01/04/2016 the petitioner was served with a show
cause notice directing him to join on duties immediately
reporting his absence from 27/01/2016 and was also directed to
-8-
submit his explanation for the unauthorized absence from
duties. Copy of the notices enclosed herewith as
ANNEXURE P/6.
5.5 That, a preliminary enquiry was conducted by the respondents
against the petitioner and after recording statement of the
petitioner and other employees report was submitted by an
inspector on 24/05/2016 holding that the petitioner was absent
from duties for a period of 63 days. A copy of the enquiry
report and statements are collectively enclosed herewith as
ANNEXURE P/7 & P/8.
5.6 That, on the basis of the aforesaid preliminary enquiry the
petitioner was served with a charge sheet directing
departmental enquiry against the petitioner without taking any
reply, wherein the petitioner was charged for unauthorized
absence of 63 days from dt. 27/01/2016 to 30/03/2016 without
information to the office thereby alleging negligence in
performance of his duties in violation of provisions of Para
64(2)(3) and (4) of Madhya Pradesh Police Regulations. The
petitioner filed reply to the charge sheet and denied the charges.
Copies of the charge sheet and reply are enclosed herewith as
ANNEXURE P/9 & P/10.
5.7 That, on the basis of the charge sheet departmental enquiry was
conducted and record of witness was recorded alongwith the
presenting officer submitted brief note to enquiry officer
wherein the presenting officer himself concluded that the
petitioner found guilty of the charges framed against him. The
petitioner also submitted his written statement. Copies of the
statements recorded by the enquiry officer and brief note
-9-
submitted by the presenting officer and petitioner are enclosed
herewith as ANNEXURE P/11, P/12 & P/13.
5.8 That, on the basis of the enquiry the enquiry officer submitted
its enquiry report on 11/01/2017 which was provided to the
petitioner on 21/01/2017 wherein the petitioner was held guilty
of unauthorized absence of 63 days without information. A 2nd
show cause notice issued to petitioner on 19/01/2017 which was
received by petitioner on 21/01/2017. In reply to the aforesaid
notice the petitioner again submitted his representation that the
absence of the petitioner from his service was not deliberate but
was due to his ill health which has been proved by adequate
documents and certificates. A copy of the enquiry report, 2nd
show cause notice and reply of the petitioner are enclosed
herewith as ANNEXURE P14, P/15 & P/16.
5.9 That, without considering the written submission and material
on record the respondent no. 3 vide its order dt. 28/02/2017
passed an order of punishment against the petitioner
terminating him from his services. Since the petitioner was
under suspension during his departmental enquiry in the matter
of Lokayukt establishment since 07/05/2016 the suspension
order was technically reboot on the date of order and it was
further directed that the decision regarding suspension period
shall be taken after the Lokayukt case is finally disposed off. A
copy of the punishment / termination order is enclosed herewith
as ANNEXURE P/17.
5.10 That, the petitioner preferred departmental appeal to the Deputy
Inspector of Police which has also been dismissed vide order dt.
30/06/2017. However the aforesaid order of dismissal was not
communicated to the petitioner and the same was applied to the
petitioner only under the Right to Information Act on
- 10 -
04/01/2018. Copies of Order d. 30/06/2017 & Letter dt.
04/01/2018 are enclosed herewith as Annexure P/18 & P/19.
5.11 That, being aggrieved by illegal, arbitrary, high handed and
unreasonable action of the respondents the petitioner has
constrained to file the present petition on following amongst
other grounds :-
6. GROUNDS
6.1 Because, the impugned order Annexures P/17 and P/19 are
prima facie, illegal, arbitrary and passed in violation of natural
justice and therefore the same deserves to be quashed.
6.2 Because, the impugned orders passed by respondent
terminating petitioner from his services only on the ground of
unauthorized absence of 63 days is prima facie, illegally and
proportioned to the charges framed against the petitioner and
therefore the impugned order deserves to be quashed.
6.3 Because, while passing the punishment order of termination of
petitioner and dismissing the departmental appeal the
respondents have completely ignored the fact that the petitioner
was not absenting from his duties without any justified reason
or with any malafide intension. The petitioner had submitted his
treatment papers and medical certificates which clarified that
petitioner was suffered heart attack and was therefore was
admitted in the hospital. In the light of the documents submitted
by the petitioner the absence of the petitioner could not have
treated as deliberate or unauthorized.
6.4 Because, the petitioner has been punished with order of
termination only on the ground that no written application for
- 11 -
leave or absence was submitted by petitioner to the department
whereas, the petitioner has categorically proved through
admission of departmental employee that petitioners wife has
informed about the severe illness of the petitioner and also that
he has been admitted to the hospital for treatment on telephone
the aforesaid statement of witness is available on record of
departmental enquiry proceedings but inspite of the aforesaid
ignoring the material evidence available on record the services
of the petitioner had been terminated arbitrarily.
6.5 Because, the petitioner has been served with a charge sheet on
the basis of preliminary enquiry but without receiving any reply
from the petitioner the disciplinary authority has held the
petitioner guilty of charges and has also directed departmental
enquiry in the same order. In the light of the aforesaid it is clear
that the respondent action was pre-determined and the
departmental enquiry was an eye wash as the respondents were
byes and prejudice against the petitioner.
6.6 That, the impugned order had been passed high handedly and
without any justification only on the ground that the petitioner
was a senior employee of the department and ought to have
submitted regular application for his absence and for getting
himself treated in the hospital whereas the petitioner has
already clarified that he was admitted to the hospital in an
almost unconscious stage and was not in a position to make a
formal application on the date. However, his wife had informed
about his illness and hospitalization in the office through
telephone on 27/01/2016 itself. However, ignoring the aforesaid
the respondents have illegally and arbitrarily terminated the
- 12 -
services of the petitioner which deserves to be quashed in the
interest of justice.
6.7 Petitioner craves leave to submit additional grounds at the time
of hearing of the petition.
7. RELIEF PRAYED FOR:
In the facts and circumstances of the case the petitioner prays:
1. That, the petition filed by the petitioners may be allowed.
2. That, by way of an appropriate writ, direction or order the
Order dt. 28/02/2017 Annexure P/17 and 30/06/2017 Annexure
P/19 passed by Respondents no. 2 and 3 may be quashed and
set aside.
3. That, by way of an appropriate writ, direction or order
respondent may be directed to reinstate the petitioner in service
alongwith backwages and all consequential benefits and
allowances.
4. That, any other appropriate relief that this Hon'ble Court may
deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case
may also be granted to the petitioner against the respondents.
5. The petitioner be awarded cost of this petition.
8. INTERIM RELIEF:
That, in the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case by way of an
interim relief the respondents may be directed to make the payment of
suspension allowance and salary to the petitioner from 27/01/2016 to
28/02/2017 in the interest of justice.
- 13 -
- 14 -
9. DOCUMENTS RELIED UPON:
As per the lists
10. CAVEAT:
That, no notice of lodging a caveat by the respondents has been
received by the petitioner.
Indore Submitted by:
Date :
COUNSEL FOR PETITIONER
(ASHUTOSH NIMGAONKAR)
- 15 -
BEFORE THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF
MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE
W.P. NO. /2019
(Service Matter / SB)
PETITIONER .. Abharam S/o. Satyanarayan Yadav
V/s
RESPONDENTS .. State of Madhya Pradesh and others
LIST OF DOCUMENTS
S. Orig/
Particulars Annexure Page No
No. Copy
1 Roznamcha Sanha dt. 27/01/2018 Copy P/1
2 Form No. 3 Copy P/2
3 Form No. 4 Copy P/3
4 Medical Certificates Copy P/4
5 Roznamcha Sanha dt. 30/03/2016 Copy P/5
6 Notice dt. 01/04/2016 Copy P/6
7 Enquiry report Copy P/7
8 Statement of the petitioner Copy P/8
9 Charge sheet Copy P/9
10 Reply filed by petitioner Copy P/10
11 Statements recorded by enquiry officer Copy P/11
12 Brief note submitted by presenting officer Copy P/12
13 Brief note submitted by petitioner Copy P/13
- 16 -
S. Orig/
Particulars Annexure Page No
No. Copy
14 Enquiry Report dt. 11/01/2017 Copy P/14
15 2nd Show Cause Notice dt. 19/01/2017 Copy P/15
16 Reply by petitioner Copy P/16
17 Punishment/termination Order Copy P/17
18 Order dt. 30/06/2017 Copy P/18
19 Letter dt. 04/01/2018 Copy P/19
Indore Submitted by:
Date :
COUNSEL FOR PETITIONER
(ASHUTOSH NIMGAONKAR)
- 17 -
BEFORE THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF
MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE
W.P. NO. /2019
(Service Matter / SB)
PETITIONER .. Abharam S/o. Satyanarayan Yadav
V/s
RESPONDENTS .. State of Madhya Pradesh and others
DECLARATION
(Under Rule 25 Chapter X)
The copies, as require by Rule 25 of Chapter X of the High
Court of Madhya Pradesh Rules, 2008 have been served upon R-1
(the person whom the copies have been served) at Indore at ........
(time) on _______ in Indore.
Indore Submitted by:
Date :
COUNSEL FOR PETITIONER
(ASHUTOSH NIMGAONKAR)
