RAJ PAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has approached this Court assailing the order dated 31.7.2007 (Annexure P-1) dismissing the petitioner from service and the order dated 29.6.2010 (Annexure P-5) vide which the representation preferred by the petitioner for reinstatement on acquittal in criminal case has been rejected.

(2.) It is the contention of the counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was implicated in a criminal case bearing FIR No.121 dated 19.04.1995 registered under Section 7/13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act at Police Station Civil Lines, Rohtak. After trial, petitioner was convicted by the learned Special Judge, Rohtak on 19.9.1998 imposing sentence to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 2 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/-. In default of payment of fine, the accused shall further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month.

(3.) This order of conviction was challenged by the petitioner by filing criminal appeal No.819-SB of 1998 which was admitted by this Court. During the pendency of the appeal preferred by the petitioner, in the light of the conviction of the petitioner, order of dismissal from service dated 31.7.2007 was passed by the Superintendent of Police, Rohtak. A line was further added that the powers conferred under Article 311 (2)(b) of the Constitution of India were also invoked. This, the counsel for the petitioner contends, is without any basis as no reasons whatsoever have been assigned by the respondents in dispensing with the enquiry to be held against him. In any case, he contends that in the criminal appeal preferred by the petitioner, his order of conviction was set aside by this Court vide order dated 2.2.2010 (Annexure P-2) and he was acquitted of the charges framed against him. On the basis of his acquittal, petitioner requested the respondents to reinstate him on the post of Head Constable which was held by him prior to his dismissal from service. This application of the petitioner was not responded to and the petitioner, therefore, filed CWP No.9189 of 2010 which was disposed of by this Court on 18.5.2010 with directions to the Director General of Police, Haryana, to consider the representation of the petitioner and decide the same within a period of one month. In pursuance to the directions issued by this Court, the Director General of Police, Haryana vide order dated 29.6.2010 rejected the representation of the petitioner. Petitioner has, thus, assailed the order of his dismissal dated 31.7.2007 and order dated 29.6.2010 (Annexures P1 and P-5) respectively through the present writ petition.