BALBIR SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB ETC

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petition has been filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of certiorari for quashing the orders (Annexures P-2 to P-5 and P-7) whereby adverse remarks were entered in the service record of the petitioner for the period from 01.04.1988 to 31.03.1989 and 01.04.1989 to 17.02.1990 on account of punishment passed against him on 22.02.1990 whereby 5 years of approved service was forfeited and his request for promotion to the post of Assistant Sub Inspector was rejected. The petitioner also prays for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondents to consider and promote the petitioner to the post of A.S.I. from the date his juniors were promoted, i.e., 01.11.1993.

(2.) The pleaded case of the petitioner is that he had joined the Punjab Police as Constable and after passing the Lower School Course, he was promoted to the post of Head Constable on 20.11.1986. While posted as Incharge of the canteen of P.A.P. Jalandhar, certain allegations of misappropriation of the funds of the canteen were levelled against him which resulted into a departmental enquiry against him. During the said period, certain adverse remarks were recorded in the A.C.R. of the petitioner from 01.04.1988 to 31.03.1989 and 01.04.1988 to 17.02.1990. In the said departmental enquiry, the petitioner was found guilty and his five years approved service was forfeited by respondent No.4-Commandant, 13th Battalion, P.A.P., Jalandhar Cantt. on 20.02.1990. The petitioner preferred an appeal before respondent No.3, D.I.G., P.A.P., Jalandhar, who reduced the punishment from 5 years to 3 years on 20.07.1990 and in a revision petition filed before respondent No.2, the petitioner was fully exonerated on 31.01.1991. After the acceptance of the revision petition, the petitioner made a representation on 16.04.1991 to respondent No.3 for expunging the adverse remarks which was recorded by respondent No.4 due to the pendency of the departmental enquiry against the petitioner. The said representation was rejected for both the years on 10.09.1991 on the ground that it was barred by limitation. The second representation filed before respondent No.3 was rejected on the ground that no second representation lay against the order of respondent No.3. Thereafter, the petitioner filed revision before respondent No.2 that since his revision petition has been accepted and he has been exonerated, he may be promoted to the post of A.S.I. from the date his juniors were promoted. The said representation was also rejected on 16.05.1994 (Annexure P-7).

(3.) The case of the petitioner is that his juniors were promoted on 01.11.1993 but the petitioner was ignored from promotion due to the said adverse remarks which were recorded due to the pendency of the departmental enquiry but as the petitioner was fully exonerated from the said departmental enquiry, he should be considered for promotion to the post of A.S.I. from the date his juniors were promoted, i.e., 01.11.1993. Commendation certificates, Annexures P-8 to P-11 were also referred to. A Division Bench judgment of this Court in CWP No.1291 of 1993 was also referred to on the ground that adverse entries would hold against the petitioner for a period of 3 years and he could be reconsidered for the post of A.S.I. Accordingly, the writ petition was preferred which was admitted for regular hearing.