BALWINDER SINGH Vs. PUNJAB STATE AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Having been non suited by both the learned courts below, in his suit for declaration, plaintiff has approached this Court by way of instant regular second appeal.

(2.) Brief facts of the case, as noticed by the learned first appellate court in para 2 and 3 of the impugned judgment, are that plaintiff has been working as a constable on the intervening night of 27/28.9.1984. He was posted on Santry duty from 9 a.m. to 12 p.m. in Treasury Office, Sangrur. Sh. Daljit Singh, D.S.P. paid a surprise visit at 10:35 p.m. and found the plaintiff sleeping in a state of in-ebriation. He was got medically checked up and later on was ordered to be proceeded against departmentally. An enquiry was held by the SSP Sangrur awarded forfeiture of his four years earned service, resulting in reduction of his pay from Rs.465/- to Rs.420/- per month. Regarding his suspension period, it was ordered that he was not entitled to any other payment except the subsistence allowance paid to him, during the said period. The plaintiff went in appeal against the order of the SSP dated 16.2.1985 to the Deputy Inspector of General of Police and then before the Inspector General of Police, but both the appeals were dismissed.

(3.) The plaintiff in the suit challenged the vires of the aforesaid three orders alleging that they were in violation of rule 16.24 of the Punjab Police Rules.