BHAGWAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner, Bhagwan Singh, joined service as Sub-Inspector of Police in the erstwhile State of Kalsia on April 24, 1946, from which date he was confirmed in that post. In 1948 the Patiala and East Punjab States Union was formed by integrating eight princely States of East Punjab including the State of Kalsia. The service personnel of all the integrating States were integrated into the Service of the Union with effect from September 1, 1948, and the Petitioner was integrated as a confirmed Sub-Inspector of Police. In 1952, he was serving at Patiala where Shri Janak Raj was posted as the Superintendent of Police. The Petitioner was dismissed by the Superintendent of Police on June 5, 1962, on a charge of gross negligence of duties and lack of control over his subordinates. The Petitioner filed an appeal against that order which was rejected by the Inspector-General of Police, Pepsu. He then filed a civil writ petition in the Pepsu High Court which was accepted on July 13, 1954, on the ground that the Petitioner could not be dismissed by the Superintendent of Police when he had been originally appointed by the Kalsia State. In consequence of that decision, the Petitioner was reinstated as Sub-Inspector of Police on August 12, 1954 with effect from the date on which he was dismissed. After reinstatement, a notice was issued to him by the Inspector-General of Police, Pepsu, to show cause why he should not be dismissed from service on the charges which had been delivered to him by the Superintendent of Police in 1952. After considering his explanation, the Inspector-General of Police passed an order reducing him to the rank of Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police with effect from July 9, 1955. Against that order, the Petitioner filed an appeal to the Government which was pending when the merger of the erstwhile States of Punjab and Pepsu took place on November 1, 1956. His appeal was decided on June 20, 1959, and the order of his reduction in rank was set aside but his annual increment was stopped for two years without cumulative effect in terms of Rule 16.5 of the Punjab Police Rules, 1934 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules).

(2.) Even in spite of the acceptance of his appeal, the Petitioner was not allowed the arrears of his salary nor was his seniority revised. He, therefore, filed a civil suit and obtained a decree for Rs. 6,262.75 on account of arrears of salary on September 5, 1962. The Petitioner's name was considered for being brought on list 'F' in 1962, 1963 and 1964, but he was not found fit. In 1965, however, he was considered suitable and brought on list 'F' with effect from September 21, 1965. He was promoted from that list as officiating Inspector of Police on November 4, 1965. The re-organisation of the erstwhile; State of Punjab took place with effect from November 1, 1966, and the Petitioner was allocated to the State of Haryana. A seniority list of the officers of the Police Department as on July 31, 1968, was published on March 24, 1969, which was actually received by the Petitioner on June 12, 1969, but he had obtained knowledge of that list as soon as it was published because on April 4, 1969, he made a representation against his placement on that list. In that list, the date of Petitioner's promotion to list 'F' was shown as November 4, 1964, which was a typographical mistake for September 21, 1965, as has been explained in the return. That representation was not decided by the Inspector-General of Police expeditiously and in December, 1969, the Petitioner filed C.W. 30731 of 1969 in this Court challenging that seniority list. That writ petition came up for hearing before this Court on October 27, 1970, when it was dismissed as premature on the ground that the representation of the Petitioner was pending decision with the Inspector-General of Police who was directed to decide it within a period of two months after giving an opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner. In pursuance of that order, the Inspector-General of Police issued a notice to the Petitioner on November 19, 1970, directing him to appear before him in connection with his representation. Instead of appearing personally before the Inspector-General of Police, the Petitioner submitted another representation on December 1, 1970, a copy of which is annexure 'C' to the writ petition. The Petitioner was again asked to appear before the Inspector-General of Police on December 22, 1970. In response to that notice, the Petitioner appeared before the Inspector-General of Police who considered his representation after hearing him personally and by an order dated December 24, 1970, rejected that representation. The Petitioner thereafter filed the present petition on January 12, 1971, claiming the following reliefs:

(3.) Written statements have been filed by the State of Haryana as well as the State of Punjab who have also been made Respondents to the petition.