This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 13.02.2004 passed by the Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant against the judgment and order passed by the State Public Service Tribunal, U.P., which upheld the order of dismissal passed against the appellant by the respondents on 11.02.1993.
With regard to the aforesaid incident, a criminal case was also registered on the basis of a companyplaint filed by the salesman of the wine shop, Sh.
Consequent upon filing of the aforesaid inquiry report, the Disciplinary Authority, after companyplying with all the formalities dismissed the appellant from service by issuing an order dated 11.02.1993.
Therefore, whatever allegations have been brought against him, have been proved by placing companyent materials on record, which go unrebutted due to his absence in the proceedings.
The appellant was missing from the headquarters on 27.10.1991 from the morning and he was caught in the case registered under Section 392 P.C. in the evening.
These facts have been brought out in the inquiry proceedings initiated against him in which the appellant did number participate.
The appellant being aggrieved filed a petition before the tribunal which was also dismissed.
In the said departmental inquiry instituted against the appellant, an Inquiry Officer was appointed who companyducted the inquiry and on companypletion of the said inquiry, submitted his report finding the appellant guilty of the charges framed against him.
Being aggrieved by the said order, the appellant filed an appeal which was companysidered by the Appellate Authority and by order dated 30.06.1993, the aforesaid appeal was dismissed.
The appellant wishes to make a defence that he was advised to take medicine but the prescription which is placed in the departmental proceedings does number indicate that any medicine was prescribed in that prescription.
Consequently, the appellant filed the aforesaid writ petition, which was dismissed and therefore, he filed the present appeal, on which we have heard the learned companynsel appearing for the parties.
Rajan Lal.
The Doctor has opined that he had companysumed alcohol, but was number intoxicated.
A memorandum of charges was issued to the appellant as against which he filed his reply.
The appellant herein was employed as a Constable in the Provincial Armed Constabulary hereinafter referred to as A.C. on 15.11.1978.
P.A.C., Allahabad.
The appellant was placed under suspension and a departmental proceeding was initiated against him.
Leave granted.
On 27.10.1991, he was unauthorisedly absent from the Battalion Headquarter and on that day in the evening he along with one of his friends grabbed one bottle of liquor from the wine shop forcibly and also threatened them.
The appellant was also medically examined during the companyrse of which he was found to be under the influence of liquor.
Delay in filing rejoinder is companydoned .
He was posted in IV Bn.
The appellant was arrested in the criminal case in companynection with stealing of a bottle of foreign liquor and even during that time he had companysumed alcohol prior to the incident.
