LAWS(P&H)-2016-12-178

PUNJAB SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

Decided On December 19, 2016
PUNJAB SINGH Appellant
V/S
STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari for quashing the order of dismissal dated 25.5.2014 (Annexure P-1), order dated 5.9.2014 (Annexure P-2) whereby appeal of the petitioner was rejected as well as order dated 10.12.2015 (Annexure P-3) whereby the revision petition filed by the petitioner was also rejected.

(2.) The brief facts of the case, as made out in the present petition, are that the petitioner joined police force as Constable on 28.8.1991 and thereafter he was promoted as Head Constable in the year 2000 and as Assistant Sub Inspector on 25.4.2013. However, the petitioner was dismissed from service vide impugned order dated 25.5.2014 by exercising powers under Article 311(2)(b) of the Constitution of India. Said order of dismissal was challenged by way of filing an appeal to Deputy Inspector General of Police, Border Range, Amritsar, but the same was also rejected vide order dated 5.9.2014. Thereafter, revision petition was filed which was also rejected vide order dated 10.12.2015. Order of dismissal, rejection of appeal as well as revision petition are subject-matter of challenge in the present writ petition.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order has been passed without recording any finding as to how it was not practicable to conduct an inquiry or as to how the petitioner had links with the smugglers. Learned counsel also submits that the impugned orders have been passed without application of mind as neither the satisfaction of the Authority has been recorded nor reasons have been mentioned to show that holding of inquiry against the petitioner was impracticable. At the end, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by a decision of case Karam Singh vs. State of Punjab and others, CWP No. 41 of 2015 decided on 1.6.2016. Learned counsel submits that same allegations were there against petitioner Karam Singh and under the similar circumstances, the impugned orders were passed in that case but subsequently his petition was allowed vide order dated 1.6.2016 and impugned orders were set aside. The petitioner was held entitled to all consequential benefits.