- (1.) Heard Shri Satya Prakash Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel. Petitioner was recruited as a Cook, a Group-D post on 11.09.2008 in Provincial Armed Constabulary Force (PAC) and posted in 37th Battalion, PAC, Kanpur. He was transferred from Kanpur Nagar to 49th Battalion, PAC, Mau Headquarters at Azamgarh on 12.02.2009. Vide order dated 20.11.2009, he was again transferred back to 37th Battalion, PAC, Kanpur Nagar on compassionate ground. Vide order dated 06.05.2010 passed by respondent no. 3, Commandent, 49th Battalion, PAC, Mau, his services were terminated invoking the provisions of U.P. Temporary Government Servants (Termination of Service) Rules, 1975 (for short 1975 Rules). Petitioner made an appeal before respondent no. 2, Deputy Inspector General of Police, PAC, Varansi, which was also dismissed. The services of the petitioner was terminated by giving one month's notice on the ground that the same is no longer required.
(2.) It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that impugned order having been passed in purported exercise of powers conferred by 1975 Rules, is illegal and without jurisdiction since said Rules are not applicable to members of police force and their services are governed by provisions of U.P. P.A.C. Act, 1948 read with Police Act, 1861 of the Rules and Regulations framed thereunder.
(3.) Learned Standing Counsel, in reply, submitted that petitioner was a Cook, which is a Group-D post, hence, his services were governed by U.P. Police Group 'D' Employees Service Rules, 2009 (for short 2009 Rules). It was further submitted that in view of Rule 29 of the said Rules, the matters not specifically covered by said Rules, person appointed to a post under the Rules shall be governed by the Rules, Regulations and orders applicable generally to Government servant, hence, 1975 Rules were applicable and he being a temporary employee, his services have rightly been dispensed with in accordance with the provisions of the said Rules.;