- (1.) This appeal has been filed against the concurrent judgments of the Courts below dismissing the suit of the appellant wherein he had challenged the order of forfeiture of five year's of service. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant was on duty at Railway Police Station, Amritsar. One Smt. Parveen Akhtar, a Pakistani National made a complaint that he had tried to criminally assault her. The complaint was referred to the District Magistrate who ordered a preliminary inquiry. After considering the report of the preliminary enquiry the District Magistrate granted sanction under Rule 16.38(2) of the Punjab Police Rules for holding regular departmental enquiry against the appellant. Thereafter, the enquiry was conducted and the punishment was imposed. Both the Courts below having been dismissed the suit of the appellant, he has approached this Court.
(2.) When this appeal was filed no question of law was proposed. Today learned counsel appearing for the appellant has proposed the following question of law:- Whether a non-speaking order for holding departmental enquiry by the District Magistrate is violative of Rule 16.38?
(3.) Learned senior counsel for the appellant has argued that a perusal of Rule 16.38 clearly shows that in a case where the police official is accused of having committed any criminal offence the criminal proceedings are the rule and only by recording the reasons in writing can the District Magistrate depart from this rule and order departmental enquiry. He has read before this Court the order of the District Magistrate sanctioning departmental enquiry and it is clear that no reasons have been recorded therein. In this connection he has relied upon the judgment in the case of Nand Nandan Sarup v. The District Magistrate, Patiala and others, 1966 68 PunLR 747, wherein a Full Bench of this Court held that failure to record reasons for proceeding departmentally instead of judicial prosecution, renders the order illegal and this dictum is followed in an unbroken line of judgments since then which are as follows:- 1. Shri Jagan Nath v. The Senior Superintendent of Police, Ferozepur and others, 1961 63 PunLR 860. 2. Delhi Administration and others v. Chanan Shah, 1969 AIR(SC) 1108. 3. Union of India v. Ram Kishan, 1971 AIR(SC) 1403. 4. Malkiyat Singh v. Delhi Administration and others,1989 2 RSJ 74. 5. Sarup Singh v. The State of Haryana and others,1983 3 SLR 585. 6. The Punjab State v. Lachhman Singh, Ex. Constable,2010 2 RSJ 474. 7. Dhan Singh v. State of Punjab and others, 2007 4 RSJ 451.;