JOGENDRA PAL (DIED) THROUGH HIS LEGAL HEIRS SMT. MAMTA DEVI AND FOUR OTHERS Vs. STATE OF U.P. THROUGH SECRETARY HOME (POLICE) U.P. CIVIL SECRETARIAT, LUCKNOW AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Art. 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India against Judgment and order dated 30.09.2000 passed by the State Public Service Tribunal, Lucknow dismissing the Claim petition no-545 of 1997.

(2.) Brief facts unfurled from the enquiry report and impugned judgment are that petitioner, Jogendra Pal, was initially appointed as constable PAC (SPF) on 01.11.1966. From the date of appointment till the date of dismissal, petitioner rendered a very meritorious service. On 111992 petitioner while performing his duty in Tilak Inter Collage, Bareilly is alleged to have very carelessly shot gun under influence of liquor causing serious injuries to colleague constable Sri Pal Singh. The injuries resulted in his death. Petitioner was medically examined and a FIR was lodged against petitioner bearing crime no-761 of 1992 under Sec. 304A Penal Code in police station Quila District Bareilly. Petitioner was tried for the above offence. However he was acquitted of the charge on 08.08.1996 after full trial. During pendency of criminal case departmental enquiry was also set up by issuing charge sheet to the petitioner on 08.01.1993 by Assistant Commandant SPF Moradabad Sri Shiv Dan Singh on two counts, firstly, that on 111992, petitioner had been under alcoholic influence while he was on duty at Tilak Inter Collage, Bareilly, and, secondly, that on the same day, he, by his negligence, fired at his colleague constable Sri Pal Singh by his own weapon causing his murder. Thus he was alleged to be guilty of gross misconduct and negligence in his duties.

(3.) During pendency of enquiry, petitioner was placed under suspension. In enquiry he was found guilty of misconduct for violation of para 4A (B) of Uttar Pradesh Government Servant Conduct Rules 1956 in as much as he consumed liquor while he was on his duty. On enquiry report of Assistant Commandant SPF, the petitioner was dismissed from service vide order dated 31 July 199 Petitioner approached Tribunal for quashing of dismissal order dated 31.07.1993 and also appellate order dated 31.10.1995 on the ground that charge-sheet was issued by Assistant Commandant who was not competent to do it without approval of appointing authority, i.e. commandant SPF; that copy of evidence was not supplied to the petitioner during enquiry depriving petitioner from opportunity of hearing; that on similar facts petitioner was acquitted of charge under Sec. 304A Penal Code by the competent Magistrate; that no date of personal hearing was ever fixed and; that Medical Officer who had given certificate of intoxication was not examined.