COMMISSIONER OF POLICE Vs. BADAL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HAVING heard learned counsel for the parties, at the outset we must express our anguish at the manner in which the administrative wing of the Delhi Police is functioning. The cause of our anguish is the undernoted information provided to us in the writ petition pertaining to the penalties which were imposed upon the respondent: -

(2.) THE petitioner was appointed on probation for two years as a Sub - Inspector on June 29, 1978 and neither was the probation confirmed nor terminated. No order was passed continuing the probation and thus it would be a case of deemed continuation of the probation for the reason Sub -Rule (ii) of Rule 5 of the Delhi Police (Promotion & Confirmation) Rules, 1980 reads as under: -

(3.) NOW to the facts.