DARSHAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner Darshan Singh who at the relevant time was working as a Assistant Sub Inspector in Punjab Police was to retire on 31/3/2016. It was vide order dtd. 4/1/2016 one year's extension was given to the petitioner in line with the policy of the State Government. During the course of events, an FIR bearing No. 12 dtd. 19/5/2016 under Ss. 7, 13 (2) Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 read with Sec. 120-B IPC was registered with Police Station Vigilance Bureau Bathinda on the allegations that in the recorded conversation between two business partners there is mention of having given bribe of Rs.1.00 lac to the petitioner. It was subsequently on the basis of these allegations vide order dtd. 1/6/2016, the order of extension given to the petitioner was recalled and he was retired w.e.f. 19/5/2016.

(2.) The instant civil writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India has come about by way of writ of certiorari seeking quashment of order dtd. 6/6/2018 (Annexure P-4) whereby the Senior Superintendent of Police Mansa had ordered providing of provisional pension, GPF to the petitioner. The premise on the basis of which the challenge has been laid is that orders passed by the Senior Superintendent of Police, Mansa were in utter violence of the rules and regulations and sought quashment of the said orders alongwith directions for fixation of pension of the petitioner and release of the same alongwith gratuity and other retiral benefits alongwith interest @ 15% per annum.

(3.) The respondents in their response besides taking usual pleas of preliminary objections took stand that upon attaining age of 58 years one year's extension was granted to the petitioner but subsequently the FIR in question has been registered with police station Vigilance Bureau Bathinda and that departmental inquiry was pending. It is averred that the following pensionary benefits have already been given to the petitioner:- <FRM>JUDGEMENT_208_LAWS(P&H)11_2021_1.html</FRM>