JANKI PARSHAD Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned counsel for the parties have been heard at length and pleadings on record have been perused.

(2.) The petitioner, who was serving as Sub Inspector with Haryana Police, has in terms of filing the instant writ petition questioned the action of the respondent-authorities in compulsorily retiring him vide order dated 30.3.2012, Annexure P2, holding him to be unfit for being retained in service beyond the age of 55 years.

(3.) Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed as a Constable on 26.2.1979. Based on the service record, the petitioner earned promotions as Head Constable on 18.9.1995, as Assistant Sub Inspector of Police on 9.4.2003 and as Sub Inspector on 29.11.2008. In pursuance to a criminal prosecution, the petitioner was convicted for offences under Sections 323,330,506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code in terms of order dated 10.3.2011 passed by the Court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Gurgaon. The impugned order dated 30.3.2012 issued by the Commissioner of Police, Gurgaon at Annexure P2 was passed whereby in terms of invoking the provisions contained in Rule 3.26(d) of the Punjab Civil Services Rules, Vol.I, Part-I and Rule 9.18, Clause (1) of the Punjab Police Rules as applicable to the State of Haryana, the petitioner was served upon a notice of three months holding his services to be not required beyond the age of 55 years in public interest. The petitioner submitted a representation against the order dated 30.3.2012 but the same was rejected in terms of memo dated 18.6.2012 at Annexure P5.