SURESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This shall dispose of civil writ petitions No. 670, 686, 688, 687, 689 and 5753 of 1992 and 16689 of 1991 as common question of law and facts is involved therein.

(2.) Petitioners in all these writ petitions were Constables in the Haryana Police and they continued to serve as such upto the date when all of them were discharged. The dates of joining of all petitioners are given in the respective writ petitions. All petitioners are aggrieved of order of their discharge. Except in Civil Writ Petition No. 670 of 992, all orders are identically worded and have been passed by the Superintendents of Police of the districts where petitioners were posted on the date of their discharge. Petitioners' grievance is that the said orders have been passed on allegations of misconduct against them and are in fact punitive in nature, passed under the guise of powers vested under Rule 12.21 of the Punjab Police Rules and therefore, the same cannot be sustained.

(3.) It has been averred in the petitions that pursuant to report given by the Dharamvir Commission which was set up by the Government of India recommending and approving the formation of Police Associations in various States, the Haryana Police Association (Sangathan) was formed in the year 1969 whose members included Constables, Head Constables, Assistant Sub Inspectors, Sub Inspectors and Inspectors. Head Constable Dilawar Singh, President of the Association and Constables Mohinder Singh and Shyam Singh, General Secretaries, had been struggling to ameliorate and uplift the lot of policemen in Haryana. One of the demands of the Association was that excessive political interference in the police in Haryana should be cut off and this demand was highlighted during the Lok Sabha elections in Haryana in the year 1990 when in certain constituencies including Meham the police force was used for political purposes. Further the Association was demanding that recruitment of constables and other members of the force should be by some neutral independent agencies as even in the recruitment of the police personnel there was too much political interference and persons are being recruited in disregard of the rules and not on merits but for extraneous considerations. Besides this, the Association was demanding better pay scales, cycle allowance for Constables/Head Constables and also uniform etc. It has further been averred that the demands raised by the Association had irked the superiors who did not want the Constables/Head Constables in the police to assert their rights, but rather wanted them to continue to work as per their dictates. Dilawar Singh, President and the General Secretary of the Association had been approaching their superior officers from time to time in a bid to get their demands accepted. It has also been averred in the petitions that since January, 1991 there was a consistent and sustained effort on the part of Government and superior officers of police in Haryana to suppress the Association and also not to recognise the Association. In a bid to do so, Dilawar Singh, President and Mohinder Singh, General Secretary were dismissed from the police service by dispensing with the enquiries under Rule 16.24 (ix)(b) and Article 311(2)(b) of the Constitution vide orders dated 18.12.1990. These orders were challenged by them by filing civil writ petitions and the Division Bench of this Court admitted the writ petitions and stayed the operation of order of dismissal. The said writ petitions are pending decision in this Court. Petitioners have further averred that the Authorities having failed to crush the Association after trying all other methods arrested Dilawar Singh, President and Mohinder Singh, one of the General Secretaries on the night of 28.9.1991. Shyam Singh, the other General Secretary was arrested on the morning of 29.9.1991. Cases were registered against them under Sections 332, 353, 148, 149 and 506 IPC as also Section 3 and 4 of the Police (Incitement to Disaffection) Act, 1922. Thereafter when these Head Constables/Constables later on succeeded in securing bail but they were detained under the National Security Act and the time of hearing of the petitions, it was submitted by the counsel that the detention orders have been quashed by this Court.