Ram Naresh Bhagat v. The Union Of India And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Letters Patent Appeal No.2119 of 2016 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16506 of 2007 ====================================================== Ram Naresh Bhagat Son of Late Jai Lal Bhagat resident of village -Jataulia, Muja Tola, Narwara, Police Station Deoria, District Muzaffarpur ... ... Appellant/s

Versus

1. The Union of India through the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi

2. The Secretary, the Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi

3. The Inspector General, Central Reserve Police Force, Gomati Nagar, Lucknow ( Uttar Pradesh )

4. The Deputy Inspector General, Central Reserve Police Force, Allahabad ( Uttar Pradesh )

5. The Commandant, 72, Central Reserve Police Force, Old Court Campus, Chas, Bokaro ( Jharkhand ) ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr. Suraj Narain Yadav Advocate Mr. Upendra Kumar Chaubey Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. S.D Sanjay Addl. Soc. Gen.

Mr. Anjani Kumar Sharan ASG ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI and HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI) 05-01-2018 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Additional Solicitor General, representing the Union of India. Writ Application of the petitioner has been dismissed. The Learned Single Judge refused to interfere with the order of dismissal, passed against the appellant, vide, order, dated 28.07.2016. Not only the appellant has had the habit of

Patna High Court LPA No.2119 of 2016(7) dt.05-01-2018 2/2 absconding from the Unit for long period of time on many an occasions, but despite proper communications and valid service, he refused to participate in the enquiry and compelled the authorities to hold ex-parte enquiry.

Since the creation of the situation is totally attributable to the appellant and since the appellant comes from a disciplined force, such kind of conduct and behaviour cannot be condoned and the spacious plea of obtaining certification from doctors about one illness or the others for his prolonged absence, cannot beget him any benefit of doubt.

The findings being what they are, the Learned Single Judge also having gone through the original record of the enquiry and not having found any infirmity, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned order. Appeal has no merit, it is dismissed.

(Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J) ( Nilu Agrawal, J) skm/- U