UNION OF INDIA Vs. PRITAM SINGH SUNDER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been filed by the Union of India against the decision of the Subordinate judge, 1st Class, Delhi, decreeing the suit of Pritam Singh that the order dated 2-8-1949, passed by the Senior Superintendent of Police, Delhi, dismissing the plaintiff from the post of Head constable was not passed in due course of law and was invalid and that the plaintiff is still an employee in the Police Force of the Delhi State and is entitled to salary and other allowances attaching to that post.

(2.) THE plaintiff joined the Police Force of the Delhi State in 1939 as a Foot Constable. In 1946 he was promoted to the rank of Head Constable and on 21-3-1948, he was Moharrir Head constable attached to Sabzi Mandi Police Station, Delhi. On that day he was suspended from service on the allegation that he had accepted a sum of Rs. 400/- in currency notes of Rs. 100/- each from Harnam Singh and Shiv Dev Singh as illegal gratification for not arresting Sant Singh brother of Harnam Singh and Hira Singh another relation of Harnam Singh. He was prosecuted. He pleaded not guilty and his defence was that these notes were quietly put into his trousers-pocket by Harnam Singh or Shiv Dev Singh without his knowledge in the dark while they were talking to him and that he was ignorant of the same till the notes were recovered by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Delhi. The trial Magistrate convicted him under S, 161, Penal Code, and sentenced him to one year's rigorous imprisonment by order dated 29-6-1948, but on appeal the Sessions Judge, Delhi, set aside his conviction and acquitted him by order dated 17-8-1948, Consequently, the plaintiff was reinstated on 29-8-1948, with effect from 21-3-1948, by Shri A. N. Bhatia, Senior superintendent of Police, Delhi. However, by order dated 15 -. 1-1949, the Inspector-General of Police, Delhi, directed a departmental enquiry against the plaintiff for having been so careless as to enable members of the public whose relations he had to arrest, to put currency notes in his pocket. The enquiry was started by Shri Jiwan Dass, Adjutant, Delhi Armed Police, Delhi, on 23-2-1949, under orders of the Senior Superintendent of Police, Delhi, who was admit- tedly the person in authority to inflict punishment on the plaintiff. This enquiring officer forwarded his report to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Delhi, through the Superintendent of Police, Delhi. The Senior Superintendent of Police, Delhi, came to the conclusion that the enquiring officer had totally ignored the provisions of Rule 16. 3 (1) has he had Framed the charge of corruption and bribery against Pritam Singh and, therefore, the enquiry held by him was contrary to Police Force Rules. Thereafter Shri Ajaib Singh, Superintendent of Police, started the departmental enquiry by reading and explaining the summary of misconduct relating to his negligence to the plaintiff on 6-6-1949. Pritam Singh was examined on 7-6-1949, and charge was framed against him on the same day. On 5-7-1949, the plaintiff applied for examination of the Sessions Judge who had acquitted him but he was not summoned in view of the fact that his judgment was already on the record and also because he had not witnessed the occurrence which was the subject-matter of the charge, the enquiring officer gave his report on 7-7-1949, with the recommendation that no action need be taken against the Head Constable, Shri Jia Ram, Senior Superintendent of Police, Delhi, however, did not accept this recommendation and found Pritam Singh to be so careless and negligent as not to be fit to be retained in the Police Force and decided to dismiss him (vide his order dated 16-7-1949, Ex. P-16) and on 23-7-1949, ordered that Pritam Singh should be put up before him. On 25-7-1949, Shri Jia Ram asked the plaintiff to explain why he should not be dismissed and after getting his explanation he ordered on 2-8-1949, that the plaintiff be dismissed. Pritam Singh appealed against this order to the Inspector-General of Police, Delhi, who passed a detailed order and dismissed the appeal on 17-10-1949. Thereafter Pritam Singh after giving notice under Section 80, Civil P. C. , filed the present suit on 14-12-1951, for a declaration that his dismissal was illegal and it is this suit that has been decided in his favour and against which the present appeal is directed.

(3.) THE plaintiff's case in the plaint was, after giving the above mentioned facts, that his dismissal was illegal on the grounds--