N.K.Mehrotra, J. - (1.) This is a petition for issuing a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the order of termination dated 13.5.1989 as contained in Annexure 3 to the writ petition.
(2.) The case of the petitioner is that he joined his duties as a Constable in the 11th Battalion of P.A.C. on 1.10.1984. On 30.4.1988 he was suspended because of he being involved in a criminal case. He was recruited in service on 18.1.1989 but the question of payment of salary during the suspension period was kept undecided because of pending criminal case. After that one Khalil Ahmad made a complaint against the petitioner on 3.5.1989. The Company Commandant made enquiry from the petitioner about the allegation of the said complaint on 10.5.1989. On enquiry by the Company Commander, the petitioner denied the allegations made in the complaint of Khalil Ahmad. On 2.5.1989, the petitioner took one day's casual leave for going to Hardoi to attend the criminal case alongwith his mother. He came back and resumed duty on 5.5.1989. His statement was taken by the Company Commander on 10.5.1989. Afterwards on 13.5.1989, the services of the petitioner has been terminated by giving one month's pay in lieu of notice. According to the petitioner subsequent to the recruitment of the petitioner, number of Battalions including the Battalion Nos. 44 and 45 were recruited which consisted of about 1000 Constables in each Battalion and a large number of juniors are still in service and the post against which the petitioner was appointed still subsists. It is alleged that the services of the petitioner have been terminated by way of punishment and the order of termination, which apparently appears to be simpliciter, but in fact it is the order of removal, which has been passed without affording any opportunity to the petitioner. It is alleged that the impugned order of termination is founded on the allegation of Khalil Ahmad for which no disciplinary enquiry was conducted and, as such, the termination order is violative of Article 311 of the Constitution of India.
(3.) The opposite parties filed the counter affidavit. So far as the matter of complaint of Khalil Ahmad is concerned, it is said by the opposite parties that the enquiry report was submitted alongwith the entire evidence and the petitioner also gave his statement in that enquiry on 10.5.1989. It is also stated that the petitioner was found guilty on the allegations made in the complaint and it is on this report that his services were terminated with immediate effect with one month's pay. It is also submitted that the petitioner cannot be reconsidered unless the criminal case is decided. It is also stated that the petitioner has an alternative remedy.;