M.Y. Eqbal, J. - (1.) IN this writ application the petitioner has prayed for quashing the letter as contained in Memo No. 148 dated 1.4.2002 issued under the signature of respondent No. 3, Inspector General of Police, Rail Division, Ranchi, whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner has been rejected and the order of termination of service of the petitioner has been affirmed.
(2.) PETITIONER 's case is that in the year 1998 while the petitioner was posted at Jamshedpur as Constable a first information was lodged against him and he was taken into custody for committing offence under Section 414 of the IPC. A departmental proceeding was initiated against the petitioner and "final order was passed terminating the service of the petitioner vide order dated 8.1.2002. In the meantime, criminal case instituted against the petitioner was concluded vide judgment dated 26.2.2002 and he was acquitted in the criminal case. Petitioner thereafter filed a show cause/representation informing the respondents about his acquittal in the criminal case. It is con -tended that respondents sought for a legal opinion from the State counsel who opined that the petitioner is entitled to be reinstated. When the petitioner was not reinstated he filed detailed representation before respondent No. 3, Inspector General of Police, Rail Division, Ranchi. The said representation was rejected by respondent No. 3 by the impugned order which is the subject matter of this writ application. Mr. M.M. Banerjee, learned counsel for the petitioner assailed the impugned order as being illegal, arbitrary and mala fide. Learned counsel submitted that when petitioner was acquitted in the criminal case on the ground that the charges levelled against him was not proved then there should not be any reason why petitioner should not be reinstated in service.
(3.) ON the other hand. Mrs. Ritu Kumar, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that service of the petitioner was not terminated on the sole ground of institution of criminal case but full fledged departmental proceeding was started and after following the rules and the procedure, final order of termination of the petitioner from service was passed in the departmental proceeding. In that view, of the matter, petitioner is not entitled to be reinstated in service only because of his acquittal in the criminal case.;