REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

OM PRAKASH BISHNOI Appellant

V/S

STATE OF RAJASTHAN Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE instant writ petition is a unique example wherein neither the Statutory Authorities nor the Court had ever passed the order considering the law in correct perspective. When impugned order was challenged in appeal as well as in writ petition, the writ petition was disposed of issuing direction to the Appellate Authority to decide the appeal on merits without realising that the appeal itself was not maintainable and the Appellate Authority, in compliance of the order of this Court, decided the appeal on merits. THE order of the Appellate Authority is under challenge before this Court. In a similar manner, the Executive, without realising the seriousness of the order passed earlier by this Court and pendency of the appeal as well as writ petition, resorted to disciplinary proceedings and passed order imposing punishment without waiting for final disposal of the writ petition or appeal.

(2.) THE facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that petitioner was appointed as Police Constable on probation vide order dated 19.6.90. During probation, he picked up quarrel with another trainee constable Mr. Ram Chandra on 20.9.91. THE appointing authority, vide order dated 24.1.92 (Annx.1), discharged petitioner from service being a probationer without holding any inquiry in respect of the incident dated 20.9.91 though that was the basis for discharge. THE said order of discharge dated 24.1.92 was challenged by petitioner by preferring an appeal before the Deputy Inspector General of Police under rule 23 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1958 (for short, "the Rules"), as well as by filing Writ Petition No., 2227/1992, wherein this order passed an interim order to appoint him provisionally. In pursuance of the interim order of this Court, petitioner was reinstated vide order dated 9.9.92 (Annx. 2). During the pendency of the writ petition as well as appeal, petitioner was served with a charge sheet dated 24.12.92 in respect of the incident dated 20.9.91 under rule 16 of the Rules. He submitted the reply on 12.1.93 and after concluding the inquiry, the Disciplinary Authority converted the inquiry under rule 17 and vide order dated 28.2.94, imposed the punishment of withholding of one annual grade increment without cumulative effect for two year. It may also be pertinent to mention that without waiting the result of the appeal or writ petition, the appointing authority passed the order of confirmation of petitioner vide order dt.2.11.93 (Annx. 5) with effect from 15.10.93. THE writ petition was disposed of by this Court, vide judgment and order dated 12.3.96 (Annx. R/2), directing the appellate authority to decide the appeal within the stipulated period. THE Appellate Authority, vide order dt.15.5.96 (Annx.7), confirmed the order of discharge dt .24.1.92. Hence this petition. APPELLATE ORDER DATED 15.5.96 (Annx. 7)

(3.) APPEAL is a creation of statute and it cannot be created by acquiescence of the party or by the order of the Court. (Vide United Commercial Bank Ltd. vs. Their Workmen (4) and Kesar Singh and others vs. Sadhu (5). The finding of a Court or a Tribunal becomes irrelevant and unenforceable/inexecuteable once the forum is found to have no jurisdiction. (Vide State of Gujarat vs. Rajesh Kumar Chiman Lal Barot and Another (6).

Click here to view full judgment.

OM PRAKASH BISHNOI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address