Tejinder Singh Dhindsa, J. - (1.) THE challenge in the instant writ petition is to the order dated 20.11.2012, Annexure P 8, whereby the penalty of dismissal from service has been imposed upon the petitioner while holding the post of Superintendent, Grade -II under the Education Department, State of Punjab. The petitioner initially joined service with the respondent -Education Department as a Clerk on 20.10.1976. Upon qualifying the Assistant Grade examination, the petitioner was promoted as Senior Assistant on 13.12.1985. The petitioner was thereafter promoted to the post of Superintendent, Grade -II w.e.f. 24.7.1995.
(2.) IN pursuance to criminal proceedings having been initiated on account of registration of FIR No. 172 dated 23.7.2007, registered at Police Station City Rajpura, the petitioner was convicted in terms of judgment dated 15.5.2011 passed by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Rajpura under Sections 170, 419 read with Section 120 -B as also Section 471 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of one year. It is in terms of invoking proviso to sub Clause (a) Article 311 of the Constitution of India that the impugned order dated 20.11.2012 has been passed. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner has vehemently argued that conviction in a criminal offence per se would not entail automatic dismissal and it was the conduct of the petitioner leading to his conviction that was required to be considered by the competent authority. Learned senior counsel would, accordingly, urge that the impugned order is unsustainable in law as it suffers from a total non -application of mind. Towards such assertion, reliance has been placed upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Union of India v. Tulsi Ram Patel,, 1985 (2) SLR 576. Reliance has also been placed upon a judgment passed by this Court in Manmohan Singh v. State of Haryana and others,, 2010 (1) SCT 604. It has also been contended that prior to passing of the impugned order, no notice or opportunity of hearing had been granted to the petitioner.
(3.) HAVING heard learned senior counsel at length, I find that the present writ petition is wholly devoid of merit.;