S SUBRAMANIAN Vs. ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has filed O.A.No.8219 of 1997, seeking to challenge an order dated 16.09.1997 of the respondent. In view of the abolition of the Tribunal, the matter stood transferred to this court and was renumbered as W.P.No.35028 of 2006.

(2.) BY the impugned order, dated 16.09.1997, the petitioner was imposed with a punishment of reduction in the time scale of pay by two stages for two years without cumulative effect. Before the Tribunal, the petitioner did not have the benefit of any interim order. Even at the time of filing of the O.A., the petitioner was 50 years old and he would have reached the age of superannuation during the year 2005.

(3.) THE only contention raised by the counsel for the petitioner was that before disagreement with the enquiry report, the petitioner was not given any notice. THE only notice given to him was on the proposed penalty, which was not contemplated under the Rules. Having made up his mind on the minutes of the enquiry report, the notice given to the petitioner was an empty formality.