R DHANDAPANI Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition is filed challenging the orders passed by the 1st, 2nd and 3rd respondents, dated 21.08.1997, 13.11.1997 and 23.04.1998, respectively, and for a direction to the respondents herein to reinstate the petitioner into service with all consequential service and monetary benefits.

(2.) THE brief facts leading to the filing of the writ petition are as follows :

(3.) LEARNED Senior Counsel for the petitioner would contend that the order passed by the first respondent dismissing the petitioner from service is a non-speaking order and in the impugned order, the first respondent has not taken into consideration the explanation submitted by the petitioner not only for the charge memo but also in the further representation. With regard to the allegation that the petitioner has suppressed the facts while entering the Police Department as Grade II Police Constable, the learned Senior Counsel would submit that it is a well settled law that removal from service is not a bar for fresh employment in Government Service and that the petitioner had not mentioned the details of his previous employment due to ignorance hence, the same cannot be construed as a grave delinquency which warrants a major punishment of dismissal from service.