AVTAR SINGH Vs. PUNJAB STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AVTAR Singh was recruited as a Constable in the Punjab Armed Police on 14. 5. 1965. He fell ill and remained admitted in different hospitals. Although he had applied for leave but no intimation was received by him regarding sanction or refusal. He, therefore, presumed that the leave had been sanctioned. A departmental enquiry was conducted against him and he was dismissed from service on 12. 4. 1978, under the orders of the Deputy Commandant, 9th Battalin, P. A. P. Jalandhar. He challenged the said order of his termination by filing Civil Suit No. 113 of 20. 4. 1981. Shri G. C. Suman, Additional Senior Sub Judge, Barnala, dismissed the suit after recording evidence of the parties on various issues framed by him and hearing their counsel. The judgment and decree dated 21. 2. 1983 of the Additional Senior-Sub Judge, Barnala, was challenged by the plaintiff in Civil Appeal No. 45 of 1983, which was dismissed by Shri Hira Lal Garg, Additional District Judge, Barnala, vide his judgment and decree dated 28. 2. 1985 The matter did not rest here and the plaintiff has brought this regular second appeal.

(2.) I have heard Shri Anand Swaroop, learned Senior Advocate with Shri Alok Jain, Advocate, for the appellant and Mr. M. S. Boparai, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, for the respondents and have gone through the record.

(3.) ON Issue No. 1, the learned Additional Senior Sub Judge found that the Deputy Commandant, P. A P and the Deputy Inspector General of Police, P. A. P. , were of the rank of Superintendent of Police and enjoyed the same powers regarding the appointment and dismissal of the Constables of the Police Department The order of termination of the services of the plaintiff passed by the Deputy Commandant, 9th Battalion, P. A. P. , Jalandhar, was valid. However, the learned first appellate Court reversed these findings holding that the Constables were recruited by the Deputy Inspector General of Police whereas the order of dismissal of the plaintiff was passed by the Deputy Commandant and, therefore, the impugned order was illegal.