RAM PRAVESH SONKARversusUNION OF INDIA AND 5 OTHERS

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                       WRIT - A No. - 17788 of 2017

Ram Pravesh Sonkar
                                                         .....Petitioner(s)
                                 Versus

Union Of India And 5 Others
                                                       .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)     : Seemant Singh, Vijay Gautam, Vijay
                                Gautam(Senior Adv.), Vinod Kumar
                                Mishra
Counsel for Respondent(s)     : Abrar Ahmad, Vivek Singh

Court No. - 34
(Sl. No. 17)
                 HON'BLE ANISH KUMAR GUPTA, J.

1. Heard Sri Seemant Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri
Abrar Ahmad, learned counsel for the respondent.

2. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner being
aggrieved by the order dated 25.11.2016, whereby the petitioner being a
selected recruit constable was discharged with immediate effect and
despite two opportunities of training granted to the petitioner, the
petitioner had absconded from training.

3. Briefly stated facts of the case are that pursuant to an advertisement
dated 23.2.2011 for the post of Constable (Male/Female) in Railway
Protection Security Force as well as Railway Protection Force. The
petitioner, herein, has applied and was selected. There upon since the
number of selected candidate was huge and the RPF/ RPFS was not
having the sufficient training centres of its own, such selected
candidates were sent in various training centres of RPF/ RPFS as well as
other training centres like S.T.C. B.S.F. Chakur, District Latur,
Maharastra and B.T.C. B.S.F. Bijasan Road, Indore Madhya Pradesh
etc. Petitioner, herein, was sent for training in training Centre BSF
Reoti Range, Indore, wherein the training centre reported that the
petitioner has absconded from training on 10.12.2014 and the same
information was also conveyed to the Chief Security Commissioner,
RPF. Thereafter on the request, petitioner was again sent for the second
                                                       WRIA No. 17788 of 2017
                               2


attempt of training and again the petitioner was reported to have
missing/ absconding from the training centre on 4.1.2015. During the
training period, the petitioner has also approached to this Court by
filing Writ-A No. 24269 of 2016 (Ram Pravesh Sonkar Vs. Union of
India and others) which was dismissed vide order dated 26.5.2016. In
the said writ petition, the petitioner had made prayer that he should be
allotted some other training centre. The aforesaid prayer of the
petitioner was declined by this Court as the petitioner has twice
absconded from the training and has also absented himself from the
examination held at BSF Training Centre, Indore. In such view of the
matter, vide the impugned order dated 25.11.2016, the Railway Board
has concluded that since the petitioner has twice absconded and such a
long period of absence from training confirms that the petitioner has
shown utter disregard to discipline which is of paramount
importance to the Armed Force, accordingly, he was discharged from
service.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the instructor of the
training centre was using abusive language against the petitioner and
used to physically torture the petitioner, therefore, he has came back
from the training, though he has again joined the training and on
23.12.2014, his mother and brother was also accompanying him and
again he was mentally and physically tortured during the training. In
such circumstances, petitioner has complained about the aforesaid
misbehaviour of the instructor before the Commandant etc. and due to
which the impugned order has been passed against the petitioner.
However, learned counsel for the petitioner is not in a position to point
out any bias against the petitioner by the instructor. The selection was for
the purposes of Cental Armed Forces and the strict training was
required and it appears that the petitioner was not in a position to cope
up with the training for which repeatedly the instructor had applied the
strict measures to bring the petitioner in discipline, which was not taken
by the petitioner on good taste and he started complaining about the
same, without there being any bias on the part of the instructor against
the petitioner. Twice opportunity was granted to the petitioner to
complete the training but he failed and absconded from training and
                                                                                        WRIA No. 17788 of 2017
                                                                  3


                                    does not present himself in the examination as well. In such view of the
                                    matter, petitioner was discharged from service.

                                    5. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, this Court do
                                    not find any illegality in the impugned order dated 25.11.2016.
                                    Accordingly, the instant writ petition is dismissed.




                                                                                   (Anish Kumar Gupta,J.)
                                    September 18, 2026
                                    n.u.




Digitally signed by :-
NASEEM UDDIN
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad