Bapna, J. - (1.) THIS is a petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution.
(2.) THE case of the petitioner is that he was appointed a Sub-Inspector of Police by the Inspector General of Jaipur Police, of the former Jaipur State under order dated 10th February, 1948. After integration he was confirmed by the Inspector General of Police of Rajas tan in September, 1951. Certain complaints reached the higher authorities whereupon the Deputy Superintendent of Raigarh conducted a preliminary enquiry, followed by further enquiry by Superintendent of Police of Alwar and when the report was sent to the Deputy Inspector General Police, Jaipur Range the latter passed an order of the dismissal of the petitioner on 11th August, 1953. THE petitioner filed an appeal to the Inspector General of Police and then to the Government, but these were rejected on 26th June, 1954 and 9th January, 1956 respectively. He has made this application for setting aside the order of the dismissal on the ground that he was not given sufficient opportunity to explain his conduct and in any case he had been appointed by the inspector General of Police of Rajasthan, the Deputy Inspector General, Jaipur Range had no authority to pass an order of his dismissal. On behalf of the State it was urged that the petitioner was confirmed as Sub-Inspector by the Deputy Inspector General of Jaipur Range, and, therefore, the order of dismissal passed by him was competent. On the other question it was said that he was given sufficient opportunity to explain his conduct and there was no irregularity in the proceedings taken against the petitioner. Learned Deputy Government Advocate relied on certain observations in the Annual Inspection Report for the year 1950 by the Deputy Inspector General Police Jaipur Range recorded some time in March, 1951. The relevant paragraph is as follows: "the following probational Sub-Inspectors were put up before me. They are confirmed from the dates on which their confirmation fell due. They will be entitled to Time Scale Increment from the dates on which it fell due. " At No. 3 is the petitioner Sajjan Singh. It is urged that prior to this, the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1950, had been brought into force on 20th November, 1950, and the Deputy Inspector General had been conferred the power of first appointment, and the confirmation recorded in the Inspection Note should be taken to be an order of first appointment. On behalf of the petitioner, it is urged that the petitioner had been appointed by the Inspector General of former Jaipur State as sub-Inspector in 1948. The integration of services took place in 1952, and the order was passed by the Inspector General of Police on 2nd September, 1952, the relevant portion whereof is as follows: - "as a result of Integration the following Officers are confirmed as Sub-Inspectors with effect from August 15, 1952. " At number 152 there is the name of the petitioner Sajjan Singh S. I. The order relied upon by the Deputy Government Advocate, taken at its face value, is of confirmation and not of his appointment. In the second place, after the formation of Rajasthan, the Integration of Services was under contemplation and while the Deputy Inspector Generals were authorised to select the personnel for the police force, so far as Sub-Inspectors were concerned, the certified copy of the order dated 2nd September, 1952, produced by the petitioner shows that power was exercised by the Inspector General of Police of Rajasthan. We had occasion to examine this aspect of the case in Bhoop Singh vs. The State of Rajasthan (Civil Writ Petition No. 31 of 1955, decided on 6th Sept. , 1956), where we had observed that while the Deputy Inspector General of each Range was given the powers of appointment of Sub-Inspectors of Police on integration of services, this power was not exercised by them and they only made a recommendation to the Inspector General of Police and the Inspector General actually passed the orders of appointment of the Sub-Inspector on integration of the services in the Police Department. Under Article 311 of the Constitution a person cannot be removed from service by an authority sub ordinate to that by which he was appointed. The authority appointing the petitioner to the Rajasthan State Service was the Inspector General of Police of Rajasthan, who had, as aforesaid, appointed him on 2nd September, 1952. The petition is allowed and the order of dismissal passed by the Deputy Inspector General, Jaipur Range on 11th August, 1953, is therefore, unconstitutional and is hereby set aside. The petitioner will get his costs from the State of Rajasthan. . ;