RAMSEVAK DUBEY Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order will govern the disposal of WP Nos. 2988/08(S), 228/08(S), 5136/08(S) and 5719/09(S). Since the matters are identical in nature, on the joint request of parties, matters are analogously heard and decided by this common order.

(2.) THE petitioners were police personnel working with respondents. Respondents passed identical order dated 27th January, 1981 (Annexure P/1 in WP No. 228/08 (S)) and dismissed the services of the petitioners. The dismissal order was passed by invoking Article 311 (2) of the Constitution of India. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that this order dated 27th January, 1981 was called in question by all the petitioners by filing writ petition under Article 32 before the Supreme Court. In the Writ petition, Shri A.V. Ganguly, Under Secretary, Ministry of Home, Govt. of M.P. filed an affidavit dated 16th October, 1984. By placing reliance on the said affidavit, it is contended that the Govt. opined that 104 police personnel were not involved in the incident and therefore, Govt. agreed to consider their cases for recruitment in some other organization. So far remaining 35 persons are concerned, in the said affidavit, inability was shown to take them back in service.

(3.) SHRI D.K. Katare, and Shri Pawan Dwivedi, learned counsel for the petitioners drew attention of this Court on the order passed in the Review Petition No. 317/1986 (Annexure P/4) dated 19.11.1886. The Apex Court by recording the contention of petitioners that as per the affidavit of said Shri A.V. Ganguli it can be presumed that no grave charge was there against the police personnel, the Supreme Court on 19.11.1986 issued notice to the respondents. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that in view of affidavit (Annexure P/3), filed in WP No. 228/08 (S) process for re -engagement / reappointment was initiated. Attention is drawn to the document dated 14.06.1994 (page 31), filed in WP No. 2988/08. on the strength of this, it is contended that since process for reconsideration / re -engagement was initiated, the petitioners withdrew the review petition.