RATTAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PLAINTIFF Rattan Singh filed a suit for declaration, which was dismissed by the Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.) Bhiwani vide judgment and decree dated 8.8.2006. In appeal, the said judgment and decree were upheld by the Additional District Judge -III, Bhiwani vide judgment and decree dated 3.1.2009. Hence, the present appeal.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case, as noticed by the lower appellate Court in para Nos. 2 to 6 of its judgment, are as under:

(3.) IT is next pleaded that the allegations of the departmental enquiry and the criminal case are similar and the same. Plaintiff had requested the police authorities not to start the departmental enquiry till the decision of the criminal case, but the said request of the plaintiff was turned down by the punishing authority i.e. defendant No. 4. Thereafter, defendant No. 4 served a show cause notice to the plaintiff on 11.3.1999 with the finding of the enquiry officer dated 12.2.1997 i.e. after about more than two years and that too is after producing the order dated 7.4.1998 of the Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Dabwali. The Enquiry Officer has not conducted the enquiry in a proper and fair manner and the punishing authority has also violated the mandatory provisions of Rule 16.38 of the Punjab Police Rules and grossly erred in interpreting and appreciating the prosecution and defence evidence in departmental enquiry. The punishment inflicted upon the plaintiff is also disproportionate to the quantum of misconduct as alleged. The punishing authority has not considered the previous unblemished service period of 20 years of the plaintiff before inflicting the punishment.