PEBAM SANTOSH SINGH Vs. THE UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. M. Devananda, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Shri S. Rupachandra, learned ASG appearing for the respondents.

(2.) THE petitioner, in this writ application, prays for quashing the order dated 19.4.2012 in Annexure -A/1 terminating his service as well as the order passed by the appellate authority dated 26.3.2014 in Annexure -A/3 dismissing his appeal. The petitioner was appointed as a Constable in the 23rd Bn. CRPF under die -in -harness scheme. It is the case of the petitioner that after his appointment, he was neither detailed for any duty nor for any training. Suddenly, the order of termination in Annexure -A/1 was passed by the Commandant, Group Centre on 19.4.2012 on the ground that he absented from duty from 30.1.2012 to 2.2.2012 and again from 16.4.2012 to 19.4.2012. It was further directed in the said order of termination that the period of absence (desertion) as stated above, shall be treated as "dies -non". Challenging the said order of termination, the petitioner preferred an appeal in Annexure -A/2 and the appellate authority by order dated 26.3.2014 dismissed the appeal on the following grounds:

(3.) SHRI Devananda, learned counsel for the petitioner placing reliance on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Prithipal Singh v. State of Punjab & Ors reported in : (2002) 10 SCC 133 submitted that when an order of discharge or termination is passed with a stigma, an opportunity of hearing is required to be given and natural justice demands that the delinquent must be made aware of the allegations and given an opportunity to submit his explanation.