VEER SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant, i.e. widow of the plaintiff, Veer Singh, is in regular second appeal challenging the judgment and decree of the Subordinate Court dated 15.06.1999 as also the judgment and decree dated 20.03.2002 passed by the Lower Appellate Court whereby suit for declaration with consequential relief of mandatory injunction was dismissed.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case necessary for the adjudication of the instant regular second appeal are that the plaintiff was proceeded against departmentally for alleged misconduct of willful absence from duty from 22.10.1992 to 12.11.1992 and from 13.11.1992 to 22.08.1994 i.e. the date on which he was dismissed from service, whereupon he preferred an appeal to the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Hisar Range, Hisar i.e. respondent No. 2. The afore -mentioned appeal was partly accepted and the punishment of dismissal from service was reduced to that of stoppage of five future increments with cumulative effect. The period of suspension during departmental enquiry till 22.08.1994 was ordered to be treated as such and nothing extra was to be paid except whatever amount had already been paid, while the period from the date of dismissal to that of joining duty was ordered to be treated as leave of the kind due. By virtue of the decision of the appellate authority, the plaintiff reported for duty w.e.f. 16.8.1996 where after a Civil Suit was filed impugning order dated 22.8.1994 passed by the Superintendent of Police as well as order dated 16.8.1996 passed by the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Hisar Range Hisar as illegal, null and void and liable to be set -aside on the grounds as mentioned in paragraph Nos. 3(i) to 3(x) of the plaint. Written statement was filed denying the claim of the plaintiff and challenging the maintainability of the suit. Apart from taking the plea that the Civil Court had no jurisdiction to entertain and try the suit, other objections were that no cause of action had arisen, that the plaintiff was estopped from filing the suit on account of his act and conduct. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed: - -

(3.) WHETHER the plaintiff has no cause of action to file the present suit? OPD.