SURINDER KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS LPA arises out of a judgment dated 4th March, 2005, passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in CWP No. 5576 of 1992, dismissing the writ petition alongwith a group of 11 such cases.

(2.) IT appears that the Appellant was enrolled as Constable in Haryana Police on 11th July, 1989. He successfully concluded his training at Madhuban in April, 1990 and after serving for about 2 months with Haryana Armed Police, Karnal, he was allocated to District Jind and given the Constabulary No. 2/770. In July, 1990, the Appellant while posted at Police Station, Narwana was directed to go to police lines, Jind for some course, but he fell ill on 25th July, 1990 with high temperature and the feeling of nausea. He was examined by one Dr. M.L. Teneja at Sonepat and he also remained admitted as an indoor patient in Pooja Hospital, up to August, 1990, when he was discharged after recovery. The Appellant resumed his duty at Police Station, Narwana on 10th August, 1990 and thereafter, he applied for medical leave for the period of absence from duty. On 24th August, 1990, the Appellant was sanctioned 7 days leave and then he went to his village. He was to resume his duty on 1st September, 1990, but due to illness of his father, he applied for extension of leave for 2 more days through a telegram. The Appellant left his village on 3rd September, 1990 to join his duties at P.S. Narwana, but due to some anti reservation movement in the State, he could not get the vehicle to reach Jind or Narwana, therefore, he got his presence marked at P.S. Sonepat on 3rd September, 1990. As there was a lot of violence and strikes all over Haryana on account of anti Mandal reservation, the Appellant could resume his duty only on 7th September, 1990. On August 26, 1991, to his utter shock and surprise, the Appellant was informed about the discharge order passed by the Superintendent of Police, Jind under Rule 12.21 of the Punjab Police Rules, on the ground that he was unlikely to prove an efficient police officer.

(3.) IN a case with similar circumstances, Hon'ble the Apex Court in its judgment Major Singh v. State of Punjab, 2000 (4) S.C.T. 1049 while placing reliance on its earlier judgment, has held in para No. 7 as: