STATE OF PUNJAB Vs. GURNAM SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The point canvassed at the bar in this second appeal lies in very narrow compass, but to appreciate it, it is necessary briefly to state the relevant facts.

(2.) The respondent in this Court was a permanent Foot Constable in the Punjab Police at Patiala in the year 1958 and was officiating as Head constable. Ignoring the other unnecessary details, on 2nd August, 1958, he was transferred from Rajpura to Samana. During joining time, he went to Rajpura and, according to the plaintiff's allegations, he was falsely accused by Shri Bir Bhan, Manager of the Nav Yug Cinema, Rajpura, who lodged a report against him under Section 34 of the Police Act at Rajpura Police Station. The Deputy Superintendent of Police held an enquiry and the Superintendent of Police passed an order on 22nd October, 1958 reverting the respondent in this Court to his substantive post of a Foot Constable. The suit out of which the present appeal arises was thereupon instituted by the present respondent for a declaration that the said order of the Superintendent of Police, Patiala is illegal, void and inoperative and that the plaintiff (respondent before me) must be held to be continuing in service of the State of Punjab as officiating Head Constable. His allegations in the plaint were that he had not been afforded reasonable opportunity to defend himself and as such, the impugned order was violative of the provisions of Article 311(2) of the Constitution. The validity of the show cause notice served on him was also questioned on the ground that the Punishing Authority, while differing from the report of Enquiry Officer, did not state reasons of such difference in the notice itself. A sum of Rs. 450/- was claimed as arrears of his pay from 22nd October, 1958 to 18th March, 1960. It was also averred that the plaintiff had filed appeals with the Deputy Inspector General of Police and the Inspector General of Police against the impugned order, but he was unsuccessful.

(3.) The suit having been resisted, the following issues were settled by the Court on the pleadings :-