STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. Vs. JAGIR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) JAGIR Singh was constable on the rolls of Ludhiana Police. While posted at PS Sidhwan Bet, it was alleged that on 14th January, 1990, he gave patta blow on the head of one Kuldip Singh who was under interrogation in a hurt case. It was further alleged that he misbehaved with SHO Manmohan Singh of PS Sidhwan Bet and he was also under the influence of liquor. Charge sheet was issued to him on the said allegations. He gave reply to the chargesheet which was not taken into account. Show cause notice was issued to him calling upon him to show cause why he be not dismissed from service. He gave reply to the show cause notice which was not considered and he was dismissed from service, - -vide order bearing No. 400 -3/ST/C dated 21st September, 1990 by Senior Superintendent of Police, Ludhiana. There was no compliance with the provisions of Rule 16.38 of the Punjab Police Rules (in short PPR) before ordering inquiry against him. He challenged his dismissal through appeal filed by him before Deputy Inspector General of Police, Patiala Range, Patiala which was dismissed without application of mind to the facts projected in the appeal. He was not afforded personal hearing before the appeal was disposed of. He filed revision against the order of dismissal of his appeal before Director General of Police, Punjab, Chandigarh which was dismissed by Inspector General of Police, Chandigarh on 10th February, 1992 without application of mind to the facts of the case. He was not called for personal hearing before his revision was disposed of. He filed suit for declaration challenging his dismissal from service ordered by SSP, Ludhiana, - -vide order dated 21st September, 1990 as also the orders dismissing his appeal and revision by the DIG of Police, Patiala Range, Patiala and the DGP, Punjab respectively being illegal, ultra -vires, unconstitutional, against equity, fair play, principles of natural justice, null and void and not binding on him and that he was entitled to all service benefits with pay, allowances as if the said orders had never been passed.

(2.) DEFENDANTS contested the suit. It was urged that on 14th January, 1990 he under the influence of liquor gave injuries to one Kuldip Singh who had been called to the police station in connection with a hurt case. He was neither dealing with that case nor had he been ordered by any officer to interrogate him. He misbehaved with SI Manmohan Singh, SHO, PS Sidhwan Bet when he asked him not to exceed his limits. He was got medically examined through Medical Officer, Primary Health Centre, Sidhwan Bet. He found that there was smell of alcohol in his breath. He was placed under suspension vide DDR No. 12 dated 14th January, 1990 by SHO, PS Sidhwan Bet. His suspension was approved by SSP, Ludhiana. Inspector Mukhtiar Singh was ordered to conduct regular inquiry under PPR 16.24. Departmental inquiry was entrusted to Inspector Amarjit Singh, SHO, PS Focal Point because of the transfer of Inspector Mukhtiar Singh. He was served with summary of allegations along with copy of the list of witness. Statements of P Ws were recorded in his presence. He was given full opportunity to cross examine them and he availed that opportunity to the fullest. Charge sheet was issued to him. He was given opportunity to produce his evidence and he produced two D Ws. He was given 7 days time to submit his written reply. He did not submit reply in respect to the charge sheet till 17th June, 1990. Thereafter, the inquiry officer submitted his findings holding him guilty of the charges levelled against him. He was served with show cause notice alongwith the copy of the findings of the inquiry officer which he received on 18th July, 1990. He submitted his written statement in response to the show cause notice which was duly considered by the punishing authority and he was eventually dismissed from service. It was denied that he submitted any reply to the charge sheet. Provisions of PPR 16.38 were not attracted in this case. He was dealt with departmentally on the charge of taking liquor in the police station while on duty, misbehaving with SHO and beating one Kuldip Singh. In such matters, no sanction under PPR 16.38(1) is required from the District Magistrate. There was no infraction of any rule while conducting departmental inquiry. There had been full compliance with the principles of natural justice, equity and fair play while dealing him departmentally. It was an act of indiscipline that he took liquor while on duty. It was again an act of indiscipline and insubordination that he misbehaved with officer incharge of the police station when he was subordinate to him. It was a gravest act of misconduct on his part to have taken liquor while on duty and misbehaved with the officer incharge of the police station and giving beating to a person who had been called in the police station in a hurt case, with the investigation of which, he was not concerned. On these pleadings of the parties the following issues were framed by the trial court:

(3.) WHETHER the Plaintiff has no cause of action to file the present suit? OPD