JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) Though all these appeals were directed to be heard together, during
the course of hearing, it transpired that on facts all these cases
are not identical or of similar nature. At the same time these
appeals can be categorized in three groups. These appeals have
arisen from the judgments of Punjab and Haryana High Court. First
judgment in point is dated 4.4.2007, which is the main judgment,
passed by the High Court in batch of writ petitions with CWP No.
9805 of 2006 as the lead case. Appeal in the said case is C.A. No.
392 of 2008. Therefore, we propose to start from this appeal so that
the veracity or the legality of the main judgment is discussed. Some
of other appeals fall in this group and discussions in other groups
of appeals would also flow from this case. In this manner, we would
be in a position to proceed systematically and coherently.
Ist Group Cases
C.A. No. 392 of 2008
(2.) The appellant in this appeal was recruited into the police service
in the State of Haryana as a Constable in the year 1971. He got
promotion to higher ranks from time to time and became Inspector of
Police in the year 2002. During the course of his employment, an
adverse entry was recorded in his Annual Confidential Report
(hereinafter to be referred as 'ACR') for the period 11.10.1989 to
31.3.1990. Though the exact report was not placed on record either
before the High Court or this Court, it is a common case of the
parties that the ACR for this period related to adverse comments on
his "integrity". It was acknowledged by the appellant's counsel
before the High Court that the said adverse remarks pertained to his
character and antecedents.
(3.) These remarks were recorded by the then Superintendent of Police,
Hisar Range, Hisar. As he wanted these remarks to be expunged, the
appellant made a representation to the Deputy Inspector-General of
Police, Hisar. His representation was rejected on 26.5.1993.
Initially, there was a stoic silence on the part of the appellant
who did not pursue the matter further for quite some time. However,
he woke up from slumber and after almost 9 years, he made another
representation to the Director General of Police, Haryana. This was
accepted by the DGP vide orders dated 15.7.2002 and the aforesaid
remarks were expunged. The operative part of the order of the DGP,
Haryana, in this behalf, is as under:-
"Mercy Petition of ASI Vinod Kumar NO. 345/SR5S (now SI No.
56/H) against the adverse remarks in the matter of integrity
recorded his ACR for the period from 14.11.89 to 31.3.1990, has
been considered on the basis of available record. The
departmental enquiry was conducted on the charges of
carelessness and indiscipline in which he was awarded a
punishment of censure. No advice/ warning was awarded to him in
the matter of integrity. But the reporting officer has doubted
his integrity. Thus, the adverse remarks are uncalled for and
without any basis and will not stand scrutiny of the judiciary.
The mercy petition is accepted and adverse remarks are expunged
in the interest of principles of natural justice. The
representationist may be informed accordingly.";
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.