BODU TARMAMAD Vs. DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE JAMNAGAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Is the phrase unbecoming of Government servant occurring in Rule 3(1)(iii) of the Gujarat Civil Services (Conduct) Rules 1971 so mush elastic that it can take within its sweep certain behaviour which may causes some displeasure to his superior and which may not be in accord with the personal beliefs and liking of the superior officer ? Assumed vagueness of the phrase has rendered an unfortunate Head Constable jobless. Hence necessity to interpret and understand the precise meaning of the same.

(2.) The petitioner is an armed constable. He challenges the legality and validity of the order dated 7/05/1986 a copy of which has been produced alongwith the affidavit in reply filed on behalf of the respondents. By this order it is directed that the petitioner be removed from service.

(3.) There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the petitioner joined service as an armed police constable in the year 1974. He was at Khambhalia Police Station since March 1978 and was occupying a quarter in the police line. It is also undisputed that the petitioner is a married man. At the relevant time one Bai Samu was staying with him in the police line quarter alongwith his wife and other family members. Sometime in the last week of June or first week of July 1984 there was an accidental fire in the house of the petitioner and Bai Samu had suffered excessive burns. She was removed to hospital but unfortunately she died.