MANOHAR SINGH Vs. THE STATE OF M. P. AND OTHERS
LAWS(MPH)-1980-10-45
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Decided on October 06,1980

MANOHAR SINGH Appellant
VERSUS
The State Of M. P. And Others Respondents

JUDGEMENT

R. K. Vijayargiye, J. - (1.)The material facts giving rise to this petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution are as follows :
(2.)The petitioner was appointed as a police constable on 6-10-1972 and was posted in district Shajapur. His services were confirmed by order (Ann. A) dated 10-12-1974 with effect from the date of his appointment. By the order No. P. M./1-B/284/78 dated 15-7-78 (Ann. B.) issued from the office of the Inspector General of Police, Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal, the petitioner was selected for training as Sub-Inspector of Police in the Police Mahavidayalaya, Saugor for the session 1978. According to the petitioner he completed his training and was relieved by the Principal of the Police Mahavidyalaya, Saugor vide letter dated 6-6-79 (Ann. 'C'). In the letter it was stated that on completion of the training the petitioner was allowed to proceed on summer vacation for three weeks and that he would be informed by the Police Headquarters as to when and where he should report himself for further training. According to the petitioner thereafter he was not informed by the Police Headquarters as to when and where he was to report himself for further training. He made representations to that effect but without any response. The petitioner, therefore, filed the present petition for a writ, direction or order in the measure of mandamus directing the respondents to issue orders regarding the posting of the petitioner and other consequential reliefs. In the return the respondents admitted the facts of the appointment of the petitioner as police constable and his confirmation to that post. It was also admitted that the petitioner was selected for training as Sub-Inspector as alleged by him. However, it was stated in the return that as the petitioner gave false information in the application (Ann. R-l) and as a criminal case was pending against the petitioner he was considered unfit for the post of Sub-Inspector and therefore he was reported as constable by Order (Ann. R-21) No. P.M./1-D/1/52 dated 5-1-80 passed by the Inspector General of Police. It was further continued that separate orders were issued directing the petitioner to join his duty as constable. That order has been filed by the petitioner as (Ann. which it was directed that on being relieved in the after-noon on 5-6-79 from the police Mahavidayalaya, Saugor the petitioner was directed to join his duty as constable in District Shajapur on 13-6-79 after giving him joining time from 6-6-79 to 12-6-79. It is significant that although by this order the petitioner was to join his duty as constable on 13-6-79, this order was issued by the Inspector General of Police on 5-1-80 and was forwarded to the petitioner by endorsement dated 11-1-80 by the Superintendent of Police District Shajapur. To complete the narrative on receipt of this order the petitioner submitted an application (Ann. 'G') on 21-1-80 to the District Superintendent of Police, Shajapur that he was willing to join his duties as constable as ordered but as his petition is pending in the High Court he would join his duties subject to the Judgment of his writ petition, and that he may be informed if he was allowed join on that basis so that he may report himself for duty. However, the Superintendent of Police rejected the prayer of the petitioner and ordered that no condition can be accepted for the joining of the duty by the petitioner and if the petitioner fails to join his duty disciplinary action may be taken against him. This order (Ann. R-3) was issued by the office of the Inspector General of Police, Bhopal on 3-3-80.
(3.)The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that when the petitioner was selected for training as Sub-Inspector and received his training he acquired a valuable right for being considered for appointment as Sub- Inspector and the order passed by the Inspector General of Police on 5-1-80 (R. 2) directing the petitioner to join his duty as constable on the ground that he was not fit for the post of Sub-Inspector is null and void being violative of principles of natural justice as no opportunity whatsoever was given to the petitioner of being heard before the said order was passed.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.