- (1.) The Petitioner impugns the order Annexure P-4 vide which he has been compulsorily retired from service at the age of 55 years when his case was considered for retention in service beyond the age of 55 years. Three months notice under Rule 5.32 of the Punjab Police Rules Volume-I was served upon him. The reason given in the impugned order Annexure P-4 was that he was placed under suspension vide order dated 5.6.1996 for misbehaving, beating and taking Rs. 100/- from a person which reflected upon his integrity/honesty.
(2.) That being the grievance of the Petitioner, he relied upon the instructions issued by the Respondents in the cases of such like persons whose service is to be reviewed at the age of 55 years for the purpose of retaining them beyond this particular age, to say, that the entire service record has to be seen and if a person has earned more than 70% good or above reports, and whose integrity is not doubted during the last 10 years, was fit to be retained in service.
(3.) Learned Counsel for the Petitioner thus, contended that all the service reports of the Petitioner have been good and except for the fact that he has earned minor punishments on a few occasions, there was No. other material adverse to him. He referred to the temporary punishments he had suffered which are as follows: (a) In the year 2001 when the Petitioner was posted in Police Post Shivaji Colony, Rohtak, he retained case file of F.I.R. No. 162/2001 with him even after his transfer from Police Post Shivaji Colony and hence punishment of censure was givers to him. (b) For showing negligence in discharge of official duties he did not take interest in disposing of tracing 15 criminal cases of P.S. Sadar Rohtak, a regular departmental enquiry was ordered and punishment of stoppage of two annual increment with -permanent effect was awarded vide order dated 31.10.2006. However on appeal to the Inspector General of Police, Rohtak Range Rohtak the punishment was scaled down to stoppage of one annual increment with temporary effect. (c) On 18.3.2008 the Petitioner was placed under suspension on account of dereliction in duty and disobedience/orders of D.S.P. Detective. Regular departmental enquiry was ordered against the Petitioner and he was awarded punishment of stoppage of two annual increments with temporary effect and the suspension period i.e. 18.3.2008 to 2.5.2008 was ordered to be treated as period not spent on duty for all intents and purposes. (d) The Petitioner committed gross negligence in conducting investigation of case F.I.R. No. 20/2009 P.S. Shivaji Colony Rohtak show cause notice was given to him but he did not dare to reply the same and hence punishment of censure was given to him vide OB No. 644/2009. (e) The Petitioner conducted improper investigation of case F.I.R. No. 189 of 21.8.2009 Under Section 148/149/323/324/452/506 I.P.C.P.S. Shivaji Colony. A regular departmental enquiry is pending against the Petitioner.;