SHISH PAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking setting aside of order dtd. 11/8/2016 whereby his request for regularization of dismissal period was declined.

(2.) The petitioner joined Haryana Police Force as Constable on 26/3/1976. He was promoted from time to time and in 2004 was holding rank of Assistant Sub-Inspector. He along with Constable Sanjay, Constable Vijay Kumar and Constable Vinod Kumar was enlisted to produce undertrial prisoner Manoj @ Manjit @ Sanjay before District Court, Rohini. Manoj was a habitual and dreaded criminal. Manoj was involved in 29 cases of robbery, theft, burglary and assault on Government Officials of Delhi and Gurugram. Manoj (undertrial prisoner) escaped from the custody of petitioner who was incharge of the police party. The respondent conducted thorough investigation and found that Manoj escaped because of gross negligence of petitioner and his companions. They took away undertrial prisoner in a car to a hotel named Metro located in the market of Sector 10, Dwarka. Car was arranged by two companions of undertrial. The undertrial prisoner, with the help of his friends, escaped from the custody of police party. Police party cooked a story that Manoj has escaped while they got down at Rajiv Chowk, Gurugram from Rajasthan Roadways bus. In the inquiry, version of the petitioner was found totally false. It was found that petitioner and his other members of police party did not fire despite having sufficient arms. In view of inquiry, the petitioner was dismissed from service. He preferred an appeal before the Appellate Authority which taking a lenient view ordered to convert punishment of dismissal from service into voluntary retirement. The Appellate Authority further ordered that absence period i.e. period during which he remained absent shall be treated as no work no pay and would not be paid anything more than what has already been paid. The petitioner was acquitted by the Trial Court vide judgment dtd. 21/12/2015 in FIR No.292 dtd. 22/7/2008 under Ss. 223, 224, 225 and 120-B of Indian Penal Code, 1860 registered at Police Station Sadar, Gurugram which was lodged against the petitioner and his companions. The petitioner claims that dismissal period i.e. from 30/7/2008 to 30/5/2009 should be counted towards service for all intents and purposes. The respondent without reason dispensed with inquiry as contemplated by Rule 16.24 of Punjab Police Rules, 1934 (as applicable to State of Haryana) (for short 'PPR') read with Article 311 of the Constitution of India.

(3.) Learned State counsel reiterated and supported impugned order.