LAWS(P&H)-2011-5-401

DAVINDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

Decided On May 11, 2011
DAVINDER SINGH Appellant
V/S
State Of Haryana And Others Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order shall dispose of aforementioned three appeals. LPA No. 362 of 2011 has been filed by the writ petitioner- ASI Davinder Singh, whereas LPA Nos. 589 and 590 of 2011 have been preferred by the appellant- State of Haryana against the common judgment dated 27.9.2010 rendered by the learned Single Judge, allowing CWP Nos. 21197 of 2008 and 476 of 2009 filed by the petitioner. The learned Single Judge has set aside the adverse remarks of 'doubtful integrity' recorded in the Annual Confidential Report of the petitioner for the period from 26.4.2006 to 31.3.2006, which was communicated vide order dated 23.5.2007. Besides this, the learned Single Judge has also quashed the order of compulsory retirement, dated 2.1.2009. He has been reinstated into service without any back wages from the date of compulsory retirement till reinstatement. However, he has been held entitled to notional benefits of increments or any other benefit which might have been available to him had he been in service and revision of pay etc., if any, for the purposes of fixation of salary on reinstatement.

(2.) The facts are not disputed. On 12.12.1978, the petitioner-Davinder Singh was appointed as a Constable in the Haryana Police. During his service career of 29 years, he is stated to have earned 31 commendation certificates including two certificates during the period adverse remarks have been recorded against him i.e. from 26.04.2006 to 31.03.2007. On 23.5.2007, the petitioner was conveyed the adverse remarks for the aforesaid period. In the column at Sr. No. 1, against the heading of 'Honesty' the remark recorded is 'doubtful'. The petitioner made a representation, which was rejected vide order dated 29.5.2008. The petitioner challenged the order dated 29.5.2008 in CWP No. 21197 of 2008. However, during the pendency of the said petition, a show cause notice dated 21.7.2009 was served upon him proposing to compulsorily retire him in public interest under subrule (2) of Rule 9.18(2) of the Punjab Police Rules, 1934 (as applicable to the State of Haryana) [for brevity, 'the Rules'] and amended from time to time. On 4.8.2008, the petitioner submitted reply to the said show cause notice. On 23.12.2008, the Director General of Police, Haryana, passed an order compulsorily retiring the petitioner from service and forwarded the same to the Government for approval as required under Rule 9.18 (2) of the Rules. The said order was communicated to him vide letter dated 31.12.2008. Accordingly, he was retired with effect from 31.12.2008, vide a subsequent order dated 02.02.2009. The petitioner challenged the said show cause notice and the order of compulsory retirement in CWP No. 476 of 2009.

(3.) It is pertinent to mention here that an FIR No. 4, dated 3.1.2007, under Sections 344, 383 and 34 IPC was registered at Police Station GRP Hisar against the petitioner and others. However, in the final report submitted to the Court under Section 173 Cr.P.C. he was not named as an accused nor summoned by the Court. On 6.12.2008, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhiwani, acquitted him in the said case. A departmental enquiry was also conducted against him, which eventually culminated into the punishment of Censure, vide order dated 16.7.2008.