DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, AMBALA RANGE Vs. RANDHIR SINGH, EX CONSTABLE NO 60
LAWS(P&H)-2007-2-149
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Decided on February 01,2007

DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, AMBALA RANGE Appellant
VERSUS
RANDHIR SINGH, EX CONSTABLE NO 60 Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) Prayer in this Letters Patent Appeal is for setting aside the judgment, dated 30.7.2004, passed by the learned Single Judge, substituting the punishment of dismissal from service with compulsory retirement.
(2.) The respondent, while discharging his duties as a Constable in Police Lines, Jind, was placed under suspension. During his suspension, the respondent proceeded on two days' sanctioned leave. He was required to assume his duties on 26.1.1984 but he reported back to the Police Lines on 26.4.1984 i.e after a period of three months. Accordingly, a charge sheet was issued requiring the respondent to show cause why disciplinary proceedings be not initiated against him. Eventually, and after the conduct of an inquiry, in accordance with the prescribed procedure, the respondent was dismissed from service by the Superintendent of Police, Jind, vide order, dated 7.12.1984. The appeal, filed by the respondent, was dismissed, by the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Ambala Range, Ambala Cantt. The respondent's memorial, filed before the Governor, was also rejected.
(3.) Aggrieved by the aforementioned orders, the respondent preferred a writ petition before this Court. The learned Single Judge, while rejecting the contention, raised by counsel for the respondent that the respondent was not guilty of misconduct, placed reliance upon Rule 16.2 of the Punjab Police Rules, and held that the punishing authority, while imposing the punishment of dismissal from service, admittedly, did not take into consideration the fact that the respondent had rendered more than ten years of service. The punishing authority also failed to take into consideration that the respondent had not committed an act or omission that would fall with the words "gravest act of misconduct" and, therefore, held that as absence from duty was during the period of suspension, the punishment of dismissal from service was not justified. In view of the aforementioned finding, the learned Single Judge substituted the punishment of dismissal with the compulsory retirement from service.;


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