MUSHTAQ AHMAD DAR Vs. STATE OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER has questioned order No. 303 of 2005 passed by Superintendent of Police, Kupwara, whereby petitioner came to be discharged from service with effect from 7 -12 -2004. The main ground of challenge taken by the petitioner in the writ petition is that the order impugned came to be passed without conducting any enquiry and that he has not been provided an opportunity of being heard before passing the impugned order.

(2.) RESPONDENTS have filed reply in which they have contended that the petitioner was a probationer and as such, no enquiry was required to be conducted against a probationer before discharging him from service.

(3.) PERUSAL of the record reveals that the petitioner came to be appointed as Police Constable on 3 -6 -2000 vide order No. 373 of 2000 issued by Sr. Superintendent of Police, Srinagar. He was on probation for a period of three years, which came to an end on 2nd June 2003. The allegation against the petitioner was that he remained absent from duty and without conducting an enquiry as envisaged by Rule 359 of the J&K Police Rules, he came to be discharged from service.