VINOD Vs. DEPARTMENT OF HOME

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, against the order dtd. 31/12/2018, passed by the respondent No.2/Deputy Inspector General, Ujjain Range, District Ujjain (M.P.) whereby, invoking the power of review under Regulation 270 (1) of the M.P. Police Regulations (hereinafter referred to as "the Police Regulation") in an appeal preferred by the petitioner, whereby, the stoppage of increment with non-cumulative effect ordered by the respondent No.3/Superintendent of Police, Police Control Room, Ujjain, District-Ujjain was challenged, it has been observed that the stoppage of one increment for one year without cumulative effect is not proportionate to the infraction attributed to the petitioner.

(2.) The present petition has been filed only on the ground that the respondent No.2 has no jurisdiction to proceed suo-motu under Regulation 270 (1) of the Police Regulation. Although an objection was raised by the petitioner before the respondent No.2 but, the same was rejected by the respondent No.2 vide the impugned order dtd. 31/12/2018.

(3.) Counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to the Regulation 270 of the Police Regulation, which clearly provides that every order of punishment or exoneration, whether original or appellate shall be liable to revision suo-motu by any authority superior to the authority making the order.