- (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
(2.) THE present special appeal has been filed by the State of U.P. challenging the validity and correctness of the judgment and order dated 2.4.1997 in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 45955 of 1992, Sunil Kumar Sharma v. State of U.P. and others on following grounds. "(I) Because the impugned order is against the material on record, as such the same is liable to be set aside. (II) Because the petitioner's services which was under probation was terminated after issuing show-cause notice and taking his reply, as such the order of termination dated 23.11.1992 (Annexure-6 to the writ petition) was legal and did not call for any interference from High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. (Ill) Because the writ petition was not maintainable as the Claim petition lay to the U.P. Public Services Tribunal. By ignoring this material fact of alternative remedy, the learned Single Judge has committed manifest error of law while allowing the writ petition and not dismissing the same on the grounds of alternative remedy." By order dated 2.4.1997 aforesaid the writ petition was allowed quashing the order dated 23.11.1992 holding the termination of the petitioner in the writ petition illegal and directing the respondents in the writ petition to reinstate the petitioner on the post of Constable with all consequential benefits and pay arrears of salary within a period of 3 months from the date a certified copy of the order is communicated to respondent No. 3 in the writ petition. Brief facts of the case are that the respondent was selected and recruited on the post of Constable in 8th Battalion Provincial Armed Constabulary at Bareilly on 1.9.1990. After completion of training, the respondent joined as probationer for a period of two years. It is during this period of probation that his services were terminated on the ground of certain alleged acts of misconduct which according to the authority was against the desired conduct of a member of disciplined force. Before termination of services of the respondent a notice dated 19.11.1992 was served upon him, which has been appended as Annexure-1 to the affidavit filed in support of the stay application. The notice dated 19.11.1992 served upon the respondent regarding alleged misconduct reads thus"- JUDGEMENT_380_ADJ9_2011Image1.jpg Reply thereto was submitted by the respondent which has been appended ' as Annexure-2 to the affidavit. After considering the reply the services of the respondent were terminated vide order dated 23.11.1992.
(3.) AGGRIEVED by the aforesaid order dated 23.11.1992, Sunil Kumar Sharma, the Constable concerned preferred Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 45955 of 1992, Sunil Kumar Sharma v. State of U.P. and others in which counter-affidavit was filed by the State of U.P. and others. As stated above, the writ petition was allowed with certain directions to reinstate the respondent in service with all consequential benefits etc.;