HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 17788 of 2017 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 Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Seemant Singh, Vijay Gautam, Vijay Gautam(Senior Adv.), Vinod Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent(s) : Abrar Ahmad, Vivek Singh Ram Pravesh Sonkar .....Petitioner(s) Union Of India And 5 Others .....Respondent(s) 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 2 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. September 18, 2026 n.u. WRIA No. 17788 of 2017 3 (Anish Kumar Gupta,J.) Digitally signed by :- NASEEM UDDIN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad