R C LALRINTHANGA Vs. STATE OF MIZORAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ petition the petitioner has challenged the order of dismissal passed by the Principal of Police Training Centre, the Disciplinary Authority, under Article 311(2)(b) of the Constitution of India dispensing with regular enquiry as contemplated under Article 311(2).

(2.) I have heard Mr H. Lalringthanga, learned counsel for the petitioner and also Mr N. Sailo, learned Government Advocate, Mizoram.

(3.) It would appear that the petitioner was indicted in a criminal case i.e. G.R. 744/98 under Section 381/411/34 I.P.C. read with Section 25 of the Arms Act. During the course of the trial, the petitioner was dismissed from service as aforesaid. Subsequent to his dismissal, the petitioner was also acquitted of the charge levelled against him in the said criminal case vide order dated 18.8.1999. According to Shri Lalrinthanga, learned counsel for the petitioner, the approach (of the respondent State in dismissing the writ petitioner after dispensing with the requirement of regular enquiry is void as no order proceeding the order of dismissal was passed in order to justify the dispensation of the enquiry. Shri Lalringthanga also pointed out that the petitioner was a Havildar in the Police Department and he was also facing trial in a criminal case of certain charges which are not so grave in nature and this alone cannot form the basis for dispensing with the requirement of regular enquiry.