Decided on May 12,2006

Bilal Ahmad Bangroo Appellant
STATE OF JANDK Respondents


J.P.SINGH, J. - (1.) THIS original side appeal is directed against judgment dated 25 -11 -2005 of a learned Single Judge of this Court, whereby appellants SWP No.1167/2004 questioning order No. 172 of 2002 dated 23 -04 -2002 of Superintendent of Police, Kulgam, was dismissed.
(2.) FACTS leading to the filing of this appeal, may be summarized thus:
(3.) BILAL Ahmad Bangroo was appointed as Constable in Jammu and Kashmir Police in District Srinagar, vide Inspector General, Jammu and Kashmir Police, Kashmir Zone, Srinagars Order No.66 (c) of 1999 dated March 16, 1999. This does not appear to be a regular appointment. However, after a gap of few months, appellant appeared and qualified all requisite tests for appointment as Constable and was, accordingly, so appointed vide Government Order No.437 of 1999 dated 07 -05 -1999. The appellant appears to have been transferred after about one and a half year to District Police Lines, Kulgam. It further appears from the records that the appellant did not join his new place of posting for a considerable period, whereafter Superintendent of Police, Kulgam, issued order No.172 of 2002 dated 23 -04 -2002 after recording his satisfaction that the appellant had not proved to be a good police official especially during his probationary period. The appellant filed SWP No. 121/2004 in this Court, seeking a mandamus against the official respondents to allow him to discharge his duties, besides seeking Arrears, of salary from January, 2000 along with interest @ 24% per annum. This petition, on objections by the respondents that the petitioner stood discharged from service vide order No. 172 of 2002 of SP, Kulgam, was, however, dismissed. It was after the dismissal of this writ petition that SWP No. 1167/2004 was filed by the appellant questioning order No. 172 of 2002 dated 23rd of April, 2002. This writ petition was filed on the premise that principles of natural justice had no been followed and opportunity of hearing had not been afforded to the appellant before passing the order impugned in the writ petition. It was urged by the appellant that protection available under Article 311 of the Constitution of India and Section 126 of the Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir, had not been provided to him. Appellant further urged that Rule 359 of J&K - Police Manual had not been followed by the respondents in passing the order impugned in the writ petition. Appellants submissions were considered by the learned Single Judge, who, relying upon State of Punjab and others v. Sukhwinder Singh, reported us AIR 2005 SCW 3477 (AIR 2005 SC 2960), dismissed the writ petition because no illegality was found in the order impugned in the writ petition. Learned Single Judge recorded a finding that conclusions reached at by the respondents were based on the ground of prolonged absence of the petitioner from duty, for which no satisfactory cause had been given by the petitioner.;

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