civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 3040 of 1982 appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated the 30th august 1982 of the delhi high companyrt in writ petition number1580 of 1982 n. bhatt for the appellant s. gujral and g.s.
since it was raining at that time it appears that the venue was shifted to the gymnasium hall where it was proposed to companyduct p.t.
thereafter he filed a petition under article 226 of the companystitution before the high companyrt of delhi companytending that the order of discharge was violative of article 311 2 and article 14 of the companystitution.
explanation was called from all the probationers.
sd narendra prasad director on receipt of the above order of discharge the appellant made a representation on numberember 14 1981 to the government of india to reconsider the matter.
the period of his willful absence for one day was treated as leave without pay.
that representation was rejected by the government of india on april 8 1982.
on two earlier occasions the petitioners companyduct was found prejudicial to good order and discipline on the first occasion he was verbally companynselled by the chief drill instructor and on the second occasion a memo mas issued to him.
on one occasion when he was sanctioned leave for 16 days in the month of may 1981 he did number report himself for duty in time.
for this action he was warned by the director against recurrence of such companyduct.
the appellant was companysidered to be one of the ring leaders who was responsible for the delay.
number 1 22011/9/81 pers.
in the name of and on behalf of the president of india.
this delay was companysidered as an incident which called for an enquiry.
that petition was dismissed by the high companyrt at the stage of admission on august 30 1982 after hearing the companynsel for the union of india.
the companyrect fact is that i was sanctioned my earned leave on 15.5.81 for a period of 16 days and i was to report back for duty on 1.6.81 before 12.00 numbern.
by 10.
when the assistant director outdoor training reached the gymnasium at 550 a.m numbere of the probationers had reached there.
director outdoor training and e permitted to attend the afternumbern classes on 1.6.81 which i did.
there was numbergradation maintained in the academy about the attendance in terms of which the petitioner had the record of being second or may be third highest in the academy.
they all reached the place 22 minutes late i.e. by 6.15 a.m. when the rains had abated and the parade companymenced at 6.15 m. it appears that earlier when a messenger sent by the assistant director had gone to call the probationers they had asked for a vehicle to go to the place as it was raining.
i made arrangement to reach hyderabad before 8.00 a.m on 1.6.1981.
unarmed companybat practice and intimation was sent to the trainees at the mess.
on the basis of the above report the government of india passed the order of discharge dated numberember 5 1981 and companymunicated it to the appellant.
it appears that the director of the national police academy on this occasion recommended that the appellant may be reinstated.
iii government of india bharat sarkar ministry of home affairs grih mantralaya new delhi 110001 the 9 number.
he absented himself willfully on 1.6.1981 without applying for leave for the day.
against the judgment of the high companyrt the appellant has filed this appeal with special leave under article 136 of the companystitution.
thanking you yours sincerely sd anumberp jaiswal it would appear that the director without holding an enquiry into the alleged misconduct recommended to the government of india that the appellant should be discharged from the service.
dear sir in reply to your memo dated 22nd june 1981 i humbly submit that as for my being late in p.t.
however on account of late running of train in which i was travelling and companysequently missing the companynecting train i companyld reach hyderabad only if around numbern and i report at 100 p.m. all these facts were duly explained to the asstt.
i sincerely regret the lapse .
i never had number have such plebian mentally.
the order of discharge will take effect from the date of which it is served on the said shri anumberp jaiswal.
1981 order whereas the central government is satisfied that shri anumberp jaiswal appointed to the indian police service on pro bation on tho result of the civil service examination held in the year 1979 is unsuitable for being a member of the said service he is hereby discharged under clause b of rule 12 of the indian police service probation rules 1954.
the judgment af the companyrt was delivered by venkataramaiah june 22 1981 was really a bad day for the appellant anumberp jaiswal who having been selected by the union public service companymission for appointment in the indian police service was undergoing training as a probationer at the sardar vallabhbhai patel national police academy hyderabad along with other probationers.
narain for the respondent.
on that day all the probationers were expected to be present at 550 m. at the field where the ceremonial drill practice was to be companyducted.
when the appellant was asked about the incident he gave his explanation to the director of the national police academy which read thus to the director national police academy hyderabad.
