JAGDISH PRASAD Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Siddharth Khare, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Pankaj Rai, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel.

(2.) The petitioner was recruited as Constable in the year 1982 and was posted in the Provincial Armed Constabulary on 15.03.1982. The petitioner was transferred to the Civil Police in the year 1988 and was posted in district Budaun. Superintendent of Police, Budaun vide order dated 27.12.1997 dismissed the petitioner from service, which is impugned in the present writ petition. The dismissal order has been passed without making any inquiry exercising the power under Rule 8(2)(b) of U.P.Police Subordinate Rank (Punishment & Appeal), Rules, 1991 (hereinafter referred to as "Rules, 1991"), which gives power to the authority concerned to award the punishment without inquiry after recording the reasons. In the impugned order, respondent recorded the reasons namely that the petitioner has been asked to arrest one Sri Aaram Singh, involved in case crime no.276 of 1997 under Section 302 I.P.C. but instead of arresting him he allowed him to run away, which estbalishes the misconduct and the collusion with the criminals, due to the aforesaid reasons the delinquent has been transferred to police lines and he threatened to use political pressure. Apart from this on account of his activity, the local police are in trouble and terror exist in the general public and in case, if he may remain there it may cause some incidence.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the reasons given for exercising the powers under Rule 8(2)(b) of Rules, 1991 and waiving the inquiry are not justified. The allegations are base-less and without any substance, inasmuch as the petitioner was always available for the interrogation and the inquiry could be made after following the proper procedure and, therefore, the impugned order is bad in law. He placed reliance of this Court in the case of Om Prakash Yadav Vs. State of U.P. and others, 2012 7 ADJ 74. He further submitted that this Court while entertaining the writ petition has stayed the operation of the impugned order dated 27.12.1997 passed by Superintendent of Police, Budaun. The petitioner is still working.