(1.) This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 28/2/1989 [Annexure `A'] passed by the D.S.P., Western Railway, Baroda, dismissing the petitioner from service, and also the subsequent order dated 19/3/1990 [Annexure `B'] passed by the D.I.G., confirming the above order. The petitioner has prayed for reinstatement with full backwages.
(2.) The petitioner joined the services as an unarmed police constable in the year 1963. The petitioner was posted as a railway constable. The petitioner's wife was also a lady constable in the police department. On account of frequent transfers, the petitioner had made a grievance against such transfers. It appears that the petitioner had also made grievance about delay in release of the increments in his wife's salary. The petitioner was making representations and ultimately, when he found that his grievances were not being redressed, he sent a notice that he will go on hunger strike to death. The petitioner started his hunger strike in front of the western railway police, Vadodara on 26/1/1985. The petitioner called off his strike on 1/4/1985 as his son was sick. During this period, majority of the petitioner's grievances were redressed.
(3.) At the hearing of this petition, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the petitioner was acquitted by the Criminal Court, the respondent ought not to have held any departmental inquiry. In any case, there is no misconduct, if at all, in going on hunger strike. Otherwise also, the penalty of dismissal imposed upon the petitioner was too harsh and disproportionate, considering the fact that the petitioner had already put in 25 years of service and the petitioner would be losing his retirement benefits. Strong reliance has been placed by Mr. Oza on the decision in Chandresh Pande v/s Union of India, 1985 LAB. I.C. 1490, taking the view that the conduct of an employee going on hunger strike was not unbecoming of a government servant.