BADAL DUTTA Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition under Section 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing the order dated 8.10.91 (Annexure-A) discharging the petitioner from service.

(2.) I have heard Mr B. Das, learned senior counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr S. Das, learned counsel for the respondents.

(3.) The petitioner Sri Badal Dutta was appointed as a constable in South Tripura district and joined the service on 18.1.85. By impugned order dated 8.10.91 (Annexure-A to the writ petition), the petitioner has been discharged from service under Police Regulations of Bengal, 1943 (for short, the PRB) Regulation 746 (k). The grievance of the petitioner as stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the impugned order puts a stigma on the petitioner, and as such his services could not be dispensed with without a proper inquiry envisaged under Art. 311(2) of the Constitution of India. On the other hand, the argument of the learned counsel for the respondent appointing authority is that the performance of the services of the petitioner during the probation period was highly unsatisfactory, he repeatedly absented himself from duty for days together and so he has been rightly discharged under Regulation 746(k) of the PRB.