Manoj Kumar Gupta, J. - (1.) Heard Sri Samarth Singh holding brief of Sri V.K. Singh for the petitioners and learned standing counsel for the State respondents.
(2.) The petitioners have called into question the legality of orders passed by Deputy Inspector General of Police, PAC, Varanasi Region, Varanasi, whereby punishment of reversion (notional) has been inflicted upon the petitioners in purported exercise of power under Rule 4 of the U.P. Police Officers of the Subordinate Ranks (Punishment and Appeal) Rules 1991 (for short 'the Rules').
(3.) The petitioners were recruited as Constables in P.A.C. and after sometime they were promoted as Head Constables. They were subjected to disciplinary proceedings by issuing a charge sheet. In these proceedings, the Disciplinary Authority passed an order of dismissal from service against the petitioners in the year 2002 and aggrieved whereby, the petitioners filed appeal, which was dismissed. Thereafter, they filed revision, which also met the same fate. The petitioners filed claim petition before the State Public Service Tribunal, which was allowed by award dated 31.8.2007. The Tribunal directed for reinstatement of the petitioners in service, but held that the petitioners would not be entitled to salary from the date of dismissal to the date of reinstatement, though the said period would be counted for continuity in service. The Tribunal granted liberty to the respondents to hold a fresh enquiry to the extent of re-evaluating the evidence on record and drawing conclusions thereon. Against the order of the Tribunal, the respondents filed Writ Petition No.847 (S/B) of 2008 before the Lucknow Bench, which was allowed by a judgment dated 17.3.2009. The order of the Tribunal in so far as it directed for reinstatement of the petitioners in service was upheld, but the other part was modified and the respondents were permitted to pass a fresh and reasoned order on basis of existing material on record.;