' S. HAFIZUR RAHMAN (MEMBER),-This is an appeal against dismissal from service on the charge of absence from duty. Muhammad Jamil, who is the appellant in this case, was dismissed as Foot Constable by order dated 9th January, 1979 issued by the S. P., Lahore Cantonment. The appellant filed an appeal with the D.I.-G., Police, Lahore Range, which was rejected vide order dated 5th August, 1979. A representation/revision made to the Inspector-General of Police was turned down on 5th April, 1979.
2. We heard the parties and went over the documents filed by them. The appeal arises out of the fact that Muhammad Jamil, with eight years' service as Foot Constable, proceeded on two days leave on 8th October, 1977 while he was posted at P. S. Qila Gujjar Singh, Lahore, and reported back for duty on 9th January, 1979, i,e, after a period of more than one year. He was sent to P. S. Civil Lines, having been suspended during his absence, and served with a charge sheet when he returned to P. S. Qila Gujar Singh. The appellant did not reply to the charge-sheet, nor did he later report in the P. S. As a result of ex parte proceedings he was dismissed from service on 24th January, 1979.
3. The arguments advanced by the appellant in the memorandum of appeal describe the impugned order of dismissal as vague, unlawful, not being a speaking order, bad in law, in violation of the principles of natural justice, etc, etc. But do not reveal in what circumstances he was prevented from reporting for duty for the long period of a year and two months except to complain that his leave application and medical certificates were not taken into consideration. Learned counsel for the appellant presented us with Photostat copies of ten certificates issued by Dr. S. M.
Raza Bokhari, Medical Officer-in-Charge, Municipal Civil Hospital, Kot Radha Kishan, stating that the appellant was suffering from an ailment which is written so illegibly that it cannot be deciphered, followed by a certificate of fitness issued by the same doctor on 8th January, 1979. It was submitted that the original M. Cs. Were sent by the appellant to his office of posting but were ignored by the respondent S. P. Learned counsel submitted that an enquiry was imperative in such a case and that the appellant should not have been punished unheard.
4. we are afraid we have not been convinced by the arguments made by the appellant. A member of a disciplined forces whose responsibilities. Are important as well as sensitive, is not expected to behave like the appellant. Whatever the nature of his sickness, it was not impossible for him to send in a proper leave application from his village near Bhai Pheru where he is supposed to have gone on two days' leave on 8th October, 1977. It is significant that nothing positive was stated by the appellant when we asked him what he was suffering from during this long period of absence. As mentioned by us above, even the M. Cs. Takes care not to indicate the nature of his illness clearly, nor do they say that the patient was absolutely bed-ridden for a year and two months. Suddenly, on 8th January, 1979 he was found fit enough to report for duty the next day. All this is too fantastic to be credible. What we are asked to believe is that in more than one year the patient was not well enough even for a day to write an application describing his predicament in detail, and that he could only go to obtain an M. C. Every month or every two months from Dr. S. M. Raza Bokhari in Kot Radha Kishan and send it on to his office without any other word of explanation. This is asking too much. As for his contention that he was condemned unheard, we notice that he was given a hearing both by the D. I, G. And the Additional I. G. P.
5. We find, in view of the above, that the action taken against the appellant by the respondents was justified by his extreme lack of sense of responsibility and see no reason to interfere in the matter.
The appeal is dismissed in Limine.