STATE OF J&K Vs. MOHAMMAD IQBAL MALLAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE instant appeal under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent is directed against judgment and order dated 05.04.2012 rendered by the learned Single Judge of this Court, holding that the petitioner - respondent could not be disengaged from discharging the duties as Special Police Officer (SPO) and the order of disengagement dated 01.07.2011 was liable to be set aside. It is appropriate to mention that the petitioner - respondent was engaged to discharge the duties as SPO for an honorarium of Rs. 3000/ - per month vide Order dated 18.10.2008. On account of absence from duty he was disengaged. The learned Writ Court held in a short order that the order of disengagement suffers from violation of principles of natural justice and therefore it was quashed. The impugned judgment and order dated 05.04.2012 runs into few paras which is set out below in extenso: -

(2.) MR . R. A. Khan, learned AAG has vehemently argued that the petitioner - respondent was not holding any post under any rules warranting compliance of rules of natural justice. He has stated that in a case where an employee does not hold any post then no enquiry is required to be held. According to Mr. Khan there are no statutory rules governing the service conditions of SPO 's.

(3.) HAVING heard learned counsel for the parties we are of the considered view that once the petitioner - respondent was not holding any post regulated by any statutory rules, then it is not possible to hold that a departmental enquiry was required to be held although the SPOs might be discharging significant duties at their respective places. In somewhat similar circumstances the issue was raised before Hon 'ble the Supreme Court in the case of State of Karnataka v. Ameerbi, (2007) 11 SCC 681. Considering the judgment rendered in the case of State of Assam v. Kanak Chandra Dutta, AIR 1967 SC, 884, their Lordships of Hon 'ble the Supreme Court held in para 29 as under: -