SURENDRA PRASAD PANDE Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by order dated 15-11-1995 imposing upon him a punishment of compulsory retirement from service.

(2.) BRIEF facts necessary for decision of the present case are that the petitioner was served with a charge-sheet on 21-6-1995 in respect of charges which related to the period when the petitioner was posted as Sub Inspector/ thana Incharge, Piplaud, along with another officer, i. e. , A. S. I. , M. L. Arya. Charges against the officers were that on 18-1-1995 one Shri Ramdas and tulsiram came to the police station to lodge a report in respect of abduction of their sister Sonkali and Jamuna Bai but the petitioner did not record the said report immediately thus, showing gross dereliction of duty. The charge against shri Arya, ASI was that instead of registering two cases of missing persons he registered only one case. The enquiry was conducted in which the charge was found to be partly proved. Show-cause notice dated 24-1-1995 was issued to the petitioner proposing imposition of penalty of compulsory retirement from service while punishment of reversion for one year to the post of Head constable was proposed in respect of ASI, M. L. Arya.

(3.) THE petitioner submitted his representation against the proposed punishment before the authority and ultimately by the impugned order dated 15-11-1995 he was compulsorily retired while a punishment of stoppage of two increments for one year was imposed upon ASI, Shri M. L. Arya. It has been brought on record by the respondents that the appeal filed by the petitioner against the said order of punishment was dismissed by the Appellate Authority by order dated 22-4-1997 which, however, is not a subject matter of challenge before this Court.