BHAWANI SINGH, J. - (1.) THROUGH this appeal judgment of Single Judge dated February 24, 1998 has been challenged. Shortly stated, facts are as under: -
(2.) PETITIONER was Constable in 9th Bn. Armed Police of the State. He proceeded on sanctioned leave from 19.07.1991. He failed to resume his duty on 24.07.1991 for which he submitted that his absence was due to severe illness which necessitated medical treatment. He informed the Battalion about his illness and his inability to report for duty. Ultimately, petitioner reported for duty on 19.10.1991 and furnished Medical certificate in support of his illness issued by the doctor who had treated him.
(3.) COMMANDANT JKAP 9th Bn. Jammu issued order no. 1067 of 1991 on 01.01.1991 removing the petitioner from service from 24.07.1991 the date from which he remained on unauthorised absence. Petitioner represented against this order, on which, decision was not taken, with the result, he filed writ petition no. 2361/92 and sought direction to Inspector General of Police to consider the representation of the petitioner within a specified period. Accordingly. Inspector General of Police Passed order no. 72 of 1992 accepting petitioners plea. While doing so, the Inspector General of Police recorded that petitioner had not willfully absented from duty and consequently on reconsideration of the petitioners representation, the petitioner got reinstated w.e.f. 24.07.1991 the date from which he was discharged vide order no. 1067/1991 (Supra). The period of absence was directed to be treated as "dies -non." Petitioner was thus re -instated and started performing his duties by order no.72 of 1992 dated 17.02.1992. Then the Inspector General of Police by order no. 576 of 1992 dated 24.07.1992. cancelled the order of reinstatement.(72 of 1992) and restored the order of removal from service that had been passed by the Commandant of the Battalian. Petitioner challenged order no. 576 of 1992 dated 24.07.1992 being un -warranted, unsupported by rules and in violation of principles of natural justice, thereby seeking annulment and direction to respondents to allowed him to join his duty in pursuance of order no. 72 of 1992 and treat him on duty from the date he was reinstated. Before proceedings further, it would be appropriate to quote the impugned order here: "The case of Constable Abdul Karim No. 272/9th Bn: has been re -examined in the light of rules and procedures and it has been found that there are certain material deficiencies in the order issued vide this office order no. 72 of 1992 dated: 17.2.1992 and in view of the result of the re -examined office order No.72 of 1992 dated 17.2.1992 reinstating the const. Abdul karim no. 272/9th in service is cancelled. The order issued by the Comdt. vide his office order No. 1067 of 1991 dated: 1.10.1991 discharging the Const. Abdul Karim No. 272/9th will remain intact.";