STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. Vs. GURSEWAK SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Whether or not an employee can be dismissed from service by the Punishing Authority, who is lower in rank to the Appointing Authority?

(2.) With regard to the first question, it has been contended by Mr. H.P.S. Gill, learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, that the rank of S.S.P. is equal to that of the S.P. The Senior Superintendent of Police, who was the appointing authority of the plaintiff -respondent, is only first among equals with regard to the rank of the Superintendents of Police. In this view of the matter, the punishment of dismissal awarded to the plaintiff -respondent cannot be considered as illegal merely on the ground that as the S.S.P. was the appointing authority of the respondent, so he could only be dismissed by him and not by the S.P. who was the Punishing Authority of the plaintiff -respondent.

(3.) It is the admitted fact that the plaintiff was appointed as Constable by the S.S.P. Ludhiana on 16.4.1975. He was promoted as Head Constable by the same authority on 12.6.1980. Certainly, the post of Superintendent of Police is lower in rank to that of the Senior Superintendent of Police who was the appointing authority of the plaintiff. The S.S.P. is considered to be the head of the District in the Police hierarchy in the State of Punjab whereas the S.P. is below in rank to him. Though in Rule 12.1 of the Punjab Police Rules, 1934 (for short 'the Rules') there is a mention that for the appointment of Constable and Head Constable, the Superintendent of Police would be the appointing authority, yet the Court cannot lose sight of the fact that when the Rules were framed in the year 1934, there was no post of Senior Superintendent of Police in the State of Punjab and the Superintendent of Police used to be the Head of the District in the Police hierarchy. But with the creation of the post of Senior Superintendent of Police, the rank of Superintendent of Police cannot be equated with the rank of the Senior Superintendent of Police. There is also no evidence on the record to show that the S.S.P., Ludhiana, had ever delegated his powers to the Superintendent of Police, Ludhiana, authorising him to make the appointments of Constables/Head Constables. In this view of the matter. it cannot be said that the rank of S.P. is not lower to the rank of S.S.P. Consequently. I do not find any infirmity in the finding arrived at by the Courts below on the point. The first question posed at the outset is answered in the negative and it is held that the punishing authority, who is lower in rank to the appointing authority cannot dismiss an employee.