DINESH MAHESHWARI, J. - (1.) BY way of this intra court appeal, the appellants seek to question the order dated 01.09.2014 passed in Writ Petition No. 39 (S/S) of 2013 whereby, the learned Single Judge of this Court has set aside the orders passed against the writ petitioner (respondent No. 1) in departmental enquiry and appeal; and has directed the present appellants to reinstate the respondent No. 1 with all consequential benefits.
(2.) THIS appeal is reportedly time barred by about five months. However, in the circumstances of the case, while ignoring the delay, we have considered the matter on merits.
(3.) PUT in brief, the relevant background aspects of the matter are that the respondent No. 1, who had been enrolled in U.P. Police Force, was subjected to a departmental enquiry on the imputations that he had produced fabricated documents at the time of recruitment. It was alleged that he had appeared in the High School Examination in the year 1975 from B.K. Higher Secondary School, Kursi Khera, Kanpur at roll number 500165 where his date of birth was recorded as 04.12.1956; and again in the year 1976, he appeared in the High School Examination from Nehru Uchchtar Madhyamik Vidyalaya, Kakawan, Kanpur with roll number 856359 wherein too, his date of birth was recorded as 04.12.1956; but in the year 1980, he produced a forged marksheet/certificate during the course of his recruitment stating his date of birth as 07.01.1961 and on the basis thereof, obtained the enrollment in the U.P. Police Force. It appears that in the initial enquiry proceedings, the respondent No. 1 failed to submit his written explanation despite notice and ultimately, the Deputy Inspector General of Police/Senior Superintendent of Police, Lucknow, by the order dated 13.02.2012, proceeded to order his dismissal from service after perusal of the record. An appeal taken by the respondent No. 1 remained pending and he filed a writ petition in this Court being Writ Petition No. 6777(S/S) of 2012, which was disposed of by this Court, while requiring expeditious disposal of the appeal. The departmental appeal was ultimately dismissed by the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Lucknow Zone, Lucknow on 30.11.2012. Hence, the respondent No. 1 filed the writ petition leading to this appeal. The basic contention urged before the learned Single Judge in the said writ petition was that in relation to the same charges, the writ petitioner (respondent no. 1) was judicially tried for the offences under Sections 465, 467, 468, 471 and 420 IPC. after investigation in the Case Crime No. 445 of 1993 by the Anti Corruption Organization. It was submitted that after trial, the writ petitioner was acquitted of all the charges levelled against him. Hence, with reference to Regulations 492 and 493 of the U.P. Police Regulations, it was contended that when the writ petitioner had been acquitted of the same charges in the criminal trial, it was not permissible for the Department to take a different view in the departmental proceedings. The decisions of this Court in the case of Kedar Nath Yadav Vs. State of U.P. And Ors, 2005 3 ESC 1955 and Dhani Ram Vs. Superintendent of Police, Hardoi,1989 1 UPLBEC 624 were also relied upon.;