STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS. Vs. CHANDER PAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) STATE of Haryana has come up in this regular second appeal against the judgment dated 3.6.2010 passed by the Additional District Judge, Kaithal whereby the appeal against the judgment and decree dated 4.5.2009 was allowed. Vide the trial court Judgment, suit of the plaintiff for declaration and mandatory injunction was dismissed.

(2.) VIDE order dated 13.6.2006 passed by the Director General of Police, Haryana communicated to the plaintiff -respondent (hereinafter referred to as 'the plaintiff') on 15.6.2006, the plaintiff was compulsorily retired from service. The plaintiff was serving in Haryana Police as Sub Inspector. Plaintiff was recruited as Constable on 7.2.1972 with Haryana Police as he was qualified up to 9th standard. The plaintiff was to attain the age of 58 years on 31.1.2012. He was confirmed as Head Constable on 31.1.1985 and was promoted as Sub Inspector (ad hoc) out of turn in 1993. The plaintiff had been awarded various appreciation letters and cash prizes. His name was placed in promotion list F -1 prepared on 14.8.2005 as per Ex. P -1. There was no adverse record against the plaintiff.

(3.) THE plaintiff gave his written reply Ex. PW/3 to the show cause notice dated 14.3.2006 and it was submitted that the right to retire compulsorily has to be exercised only if it is in public interest or the officer is having record of inefficiency, dishonesty, corruption or infamous conduct. The attention of Director General of Police was drawn even towards the entire service record of the plaintiff. The representation was considered by the Director General of Police and vide order dated 13.6.2006, the plaintiff stood compulsorily retired w.e.f 1.6.2006. The trial Court framed the following issues: -