Sudhir Agarwal, J. - (1.) Heard Sri D.S. Srivastava learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.
(2.) The petitioner is aggrieved by the order of dismissal dated 29.10.2010 passed by Commandant, 36/49 Battalion, P.A.C., Varanasi/Mau pursuant to the charges of habitual unauthorised absence and dereliction of duty proved against the petitioner as well as the appellate order dated 23.1.2008 passed by the D.I.G., P.A.C. Varanasi Range, Varanasi dismissing his appeal.
(3.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that the enquiry officer has held the petitioner guilty of misconduct of absence for 15 days from 16.11.2006 to 30.11.2006, though it was not a charge levelled against the petitioner and, therefore, the petitioner has been punished against a charge which was not the part of the charge sheet and in respect whereto no opportunity was afforded to him. He further submitted that merely on account of absence for 15 days, major penalty of dismissal is disproportionate to the charges proved against him and placed reliance on Shri Bhagwan Lal Arya v/s. Commissioner of Police Delhi and Ors., 2004 (3) SC 384.;