EHC KISHAN SINGH AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS
LAWS(P&H)-2006-5-491
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Decided on May 12,2006

EHC Kishan Singh and others Appellant
VERSUS
State Of Haryana And Others Respondents

JUDGEMENT

M.M.S. Bedi, J. - (1.) The allegation against the petitioners that they have extracted illegal gratification of Rs. 200/- from one Ram Rattan, Cleaner of Truck No. RJ-14G-1918 by force on August 24, 2002 has been proved in a regular enquiry held against the petitioners. The report of the Inquiry Officer has been duly accepted by the Punishing Authority. The Punishing Authority had taken a lenient view by keeping in mind the promise of the petitioners not to repeat such an act in future and their previous service record has also been taken into consideration, thereby a penalty of stoppage of three future annual grade increments with cumulative effect was imposed. The appeal filed by the petitioners was dismissed by the Appellate Authority and the order dated October 31, 2003 has been placed on record as Annexure P- 12. The appeal has been accepted partially by imposing the punishment of stoppage of two annual grade increments with permanent effect instead of three as was done by the Punishing Authority. A further revision filed by the petitioners before the Director General of Police respondent No. 2, has also been dismissed by upholding the order passed by the Appellate Authority.
(2.) Mr. Kuldip Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the truck Driver and the Cleaner were crucial witnesses and they have not been examined. Therefore, the enquiry held against the petitioners is vitiated and is liable to be set aside by this Court. Learned counsel has further argued that none of the witnesses has supported the version of the complainant and therefore, it could not be concluded that the allegation against the petitioners have been proved. The arguments of the learned counsel seems to be that it is a case of no evidence, and therefore, the finding recorded by the Inquiry Officer could not be sustained. A perusal of order dated April 7, 2003 (P-8) would show that statement of seven witnesses were recorded and the statement of Driver and Cleaner could not be recorded as they were not traceable. It is evident that Cleaner and Driver were from Rajasthan and could not be found. All the witnesses have supported the departmental version by stating that the petitioners have extracted illegal gratification from one Ram Rattan, Cleaner of Truck No. RJ-14G-1918, on August 24, 2002, as an entry fee which in fact was not liable. Apart from the oral testimony, documents have also been taken into account which show the prompt reporting of illegal act of the petitioners (P-1), as is evident from the perusal of copy of the DDR No. 19 dated August 24, 2002, Police Station Banipur (Kasola). It was recorded by the officer concerned that the statement of Driver Mool Chand and Cleaner Ram Rattan were taken down by him. He has pointed out that all the three petitioners with common consent have stopped the vehicle No. RJ-14G-1918 which belong to Ram Rattan, Cleaner and recovered the amount of Rs. 200/-. It further shows that such an act on the part of the petitioners had spoiled the image of the Police Department who have indulged in indiscipline. Therefore, we are of the view that no exception is provided to sustain the argument that this is a case of no evidence. In fact, there is ample evidence to sustain the charges. The Punishing Authority has initially taken the view to dismiss the petitioners from service. However, after considering their service record, they have been let off by imposition of penalty of stoppage of two increments by the Appellate Authority. We are inclined to uphold the order of the Punishing Authority, Appellate Authority and that of the Revisional Authority because no legal infirmity could be found in any of these orders. The petitioners have been furnished ample opportunity of hearing before the Inquiry Officer and their appeal and revision have been decided, in accordance with law. In fact, the Appellate Authority has been extremely considerate and magnanimous to the petitioners by setting them off with stoppage of two increments with cumulative effect. Therefore, this petition fails and the same is dismissed. Petition dismissed. Previous Hitlist Next;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.