Michael Zothankhuma DECISION
Michael Zothankhuma, J.
1. Heard Mr. P.K. Roy, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. T.C. Chutia, learned counsel for the State respondents.
2. The petitioner's case is that he was dismissed from service vide impugned Order dated 17.04.2013 issued by the Commandant, 4th Assam Police Battalion, Kahilipara, Guwahati for unauthorized absence w.e.f. 27.04.2011 and has prayed for setting aside the said impugned order.
3. The petitioner's counsel submits that the petitioner suffered from mental illness in the month of April, 2011. Accordingly, the petitioner's friends and relatives took the petitioner to Bihar to put him under the treatment of a Neuro Psychiatrist at Ranchi. The petitioner's counsel submits that the petitioner was not hospitalized while under-going treatment in Ranchi. The petitioner was thereafter kept under treatment till 18.11.2013 and the petitioner returned to Guwahati after being cured on 18.11.2013. However, on reaching Guwahati, he came to learn that he has been dismissed from service w.e.f. 12.04.2013 on the ground of unauthorized absence and negligence of duty.
4. The petitioner thereafter filed an appeal before the appellate authority i.e., the respondent No. 2 on 02.01.2014, annexing all his medical documents issued by the Neuro Psychiatrist at Ranchi, which gave details of all his physical ailments during the entire period of his absence. However, the appellate authority vide Order dated 31.08.2014 rejected the petitioner's appeal.
5. The petitioner's counsel submits that the petitioner did not receive the memo of charge and the enquiry report, as the petitioner had changed his address to Vill: Badar PO: Badar, PS: Sikraul, district Buxer, Bihar due to his father having died long back and as his mother was living in their home in Bihar. The petitioner's counsel thus submits that the non-receipt of the memo of charge and the enquiry report amounted to denial of reasonable opportunity to the petitioner to defend his case.
6. The petitioner's counsel further submits that his prayer at the moment is to suspend the impugned Order dated 17.04.2013 and the appellate authority Order dated 31.05.2014, so as to enable the petitioner to file a representation against the enquiry report, as he had not received the enquiry report prior to the impugned order of dismissal being passed. Thereafter a fresh decision may be taken by the Disciplinary Authority.
7. Mr. T.C. Chutia, learned counsel for the State respondents submits that notices were issued to the petitioner three times and the memo of charge was also sent to the address of the petitioner which was recorded in his service sheet i.e., Haibargaon Nagaon, Assam. However, there was no response from the petitioner. He also submits that the enquiry report made in pursuance to the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner for his unauthorized absence from 27.04.2011 was also sent to the petitioner's address in Assam. However, the same also did not evoke any response from the petitioner. He further submits that the submission made by the petitioner's counsel that the petitioner was mentally ill during his unauthorized absence is false, inasmuch as, the petitioner was arrested by the Police of New Alipurduar Railway Station, for involvement in a case which was registered as New Alipurduar GRP GDE No. 53 dated 03.10.2011 under Section 41 Cr.P.C. read with Section 379 IPC.
8. He also submits that the petitioner has been unauthorizedly absent for 1594 days during his entire service period of 19 years and 11 days and that the petitioner had been awarded the following punishments during his service period as per service record:
"1. Awarded P.D. for 2(two) days 2(two) hours daily for absenting in Battalion Ma........