The Supreme Court recently overturned the reinstatement of a former Punjab Armed Forces Constable, citing his repeated unauthorized absences from duty. The decision, delivered by Justices J.K. Maheshwari and Vijay Bishnoi, set aside the Punjab & Haryana High Court’s order, which had directed the constable’s reinstatement. The apex court held that the High Court erred in considering the disciplinary authority’s reference to the constable’s past indiscipline, not explicitly mentioned in the show cause notice, as a violation of natural justice.
The constable, appointed in 1989 and later transferred to the Punjab Commando Force, had a history of unauthorized absences totaling over 300 days within a short period, including 68 days, 180 days, and 20 days. The final incident leading to his dismissal occurred in 1994, when he was absent for 37 days without permission after being granted just one day of leave. Following a departmental enquiry, the disciplinary authority dismissed him, citing both the 37-day absence and his prior record of indiscipline.
The constable argued that his dismissal, based partly on past conduct not included in the show cause notice, was invalid. Rejecting this, Justice Bishnoi, in the judgment, stated: “The consideration of the past misconduct of the respondent was not the effective reason for dismissing him from the service. The disciplinary authority had mentioned the past misconduct of the respondent only for adding the weight to the decision of imposing the punishment.”
The court further noted: “As observed, in the present case, the absence of the respondent from the duty on various occasions in a short tenure of service of around 7 years, is a gross indiscipline on the part of the respondent and therefore, we do not find any illegality in the order passed by the disciplinary authority whereby the services of the respondent have been dismissed.”
The bench concluded: “As such, it is concluded that the dismissal of the respondent was based on gravest act of misconduct, for which he was dealt with by the disciplinary authority following the procedure as prescribed and in due observance of principles of natural justice, hence, we do not find any fault in the same. Accordingly, the present appeal stands allowed setting aside the judgment of the High Court. In consequence, suit filed by the respondent/plaintiff stands dismissed.”
The appeal was allowed, upholding the dismissal.
Case Title: State of Punjab and Others v. Ex. C. Satpal Singh, 2025 INSC 1056
Click Here for Full Judgment
Lawcutor 