H S CHATHA Vs. BALWANT SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under clause X of the Letters Patent is directed against the orders dated June 3, 1992 and September 14, 1992 passed by the learned single Judge in a petition under Section 12 of the Contempt

(2.) Balwant Singh, an Assistant Sub Inspector of Police was prematurely retired vide order dated September 12, 1987. This order was passed in exercise of the powers under Rule 3(1)(a) of the Punjab Civil Services (Premature Retirement) Rules, 1975. He had challenged this order through Civil Writ Petition No. 8360 of 1988. Vide judgment dated February 16, 1990, a learned single Judge of this Court allowed the writ petition on the ground that the order of compulsory retirement was without jurisdiction. Even the order passed on the representation of the official was quashed. It was directed that "the petitioner should be reinstated within one month from today. The petitioner will be entitled to all consequential benefits including arrears of pay and allowances, seniority and promotion. He will also be entitled to interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum on the arrears of pay and allowances etc... .."

(3.) In pursuance of the aforesaid directions, the official was reinstated. He was paid the arrears etc. Still further, he was confirmed as an Assistant Sub Inspector with effect from July 1, 1989 and promoted as Sub Inspector w.e.f. July 12, 1989. However, Balwant Singh approached this court through a petition under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act in August 1991 complaining that the respondents had wilfully disobeyed the order. Notice of this contempt petition was given to the present appellants. Two written statements were filed. It was inter alia pointed out that Balwant Singh was involved in a corruption case. FIR No. 155 dated July 11, 1990 had been recorded against him. It was further alleged that he had committed offences under Section 13(2) read with Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. He was accused of having accepted illegal gratification from Buta Singh while posted at a police post in District Gurdaspur. The case was pending in the court of Additional Judge, Gurdaspur. Still further, in the reply filed by Mr. GIS Bhullar, the Deputy Inspector General of Police, it was pointed out that the petitioner had a chequered record of service. He had been awarded different penalties at different intervals of time. Adverse remarks had been recorded in his confidential reports for the years 1982-83 and 1986-87. Adverse comments regarding the petitioner's integrity had been made in the report for the year 1990. It was pointed out that the petitioner's claim for confirmation as an Assistant Sub Inspector w.e.f. January 1, 1987 was considered along with that of the other Assistant Sub Inspectors. He was, however, ignored due to bad record of service. Similarly, his case for promotion to the rank of Sub Inspector was also considered. He was found fit for confirmation w.e.f. July 1, 1989 and for promotion as Sub Inspector w.e.f. July 12, 1989. After explaining the factual position, it was submitted that there was no wilful disobedience of the orders which may call for the imposition of any penalty.