CHELA RAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application by Chelaram, under Article 223 of the Constitution, for the issue of a writ in the nature of Mandamus, Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, direction or order against the State of Rajasthan and the Inspector General of Police, Rajasthan, opposite parties 1 and 2, and arises under the following circumstances.

(2.) The petitioner Chelarara occupied the permanent post of Prosecuting Inspector in the police department of the former State of Bikaner in 1949, and was attached as such to the Court of the City Magistrate, Bikancr. On 5.3.49, it having been reported against him that he had demanded a bribe of Rs. 15/- from one Pannalcl Kothari who was a prosecution witness in a certain criminal case pending in the Court of the City Magistrate, Bikaner, the Inspector General of Police asked the Deputy Inspector General, of Police to make an inquiry into the matter. It is said that on 7-3-49, after holding an inquiry, the latter submitted a report. The gist of that report is that the Prosecuting Inspecfor Chelaram had asked Sub-Inspectors Hardayal and Thakurdass to get him some money from Pannalal, and the latter save them a sum of Rs. 15/- to be passed on to Chelaram but he did not accept the money. The Deputy Inspector General of Police proceeded to state that as the Prosecuting Inspector had admitted what had happened and made a clean breast of the whole matter, and as he had promised to behave himself in future, a lenient, view be taken as to his lapse in the case under inquiry. The Inspector General of Police dismissed the petitioner by his order dated 12-3-49. Thereupon, the petitioner preferred an appeal to the Administrator of the former State of Bikaner, who partially accepted the appeal, set aside the order of dismissal, and ordered that the petitioner be reduced to the rank of Sub-Inspector. The petitioner then filed a revision petition before the Government of Rajasthan, as, in the meantime, the former State of Bikaner had integrated in the United State of Rajasthan. The Rajasthan Government rejected the petition on 3-11-1950. Thereafter the petitioner further filed a review application to the Government of Rajasthan, which, according to the petitioner, appears to have been rejected although he has not been informed of the final orders passed in the matter. The petitioner has, therefore, filed the present writ application. His contention is twofold. In the first place it is urged that the inquiry made against him by the Deputy Inspector General of Police was illegal inasmuch as it was not conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Rules prescribed in the Police Manual for conducting departmental inquiries in the former State of Bikaner. Reliance was placed in particular on para 57, Chap V of the said Rules and it is contended that no statement summarising the alleged mis-conduct was read out to the petitioner, and that he came to know of the allegations against him only after he had been dismissed. It is further contended that no charge-sheet was served upon the petitioner under para 59 of Chap V. and, therefore, the entire inquiry is illegal and void against the petitioner. In the second place, the petitioner contends that on 311- 1950 when the Rajasthan Government rejected his revision petition against the order of the Administrator, the Constitution of India had in the meantime come into force on 26-1-1950. According to Article 320 (3)(c) of the Constitution, it was imperative for the State of Rajasthan to consult the State Public Service Commission before passing final orders in his case, as the matter before the Government arising out of his memorial or petition was a disciplinary matter affecting a person serving under the Government of Rajasthan in a civil capacity, and, therefore, fell within the four corners of that Article. The contention of the petitioner is that as this was not done, the State Government had committed a breach of the provisions of the Constitution, and, therefore, this Court should interfere in the matter, and issue a suitable direction to the State that it must consult the Public Service Commission, and thereafter dispose of the revision petition filed by the petitioner to the Rajasthan Government. The petitioner has, therefore, prayed that this Court may issue a writ or a suitable order against the opposite parties quashing the proceedings including the order of degradation passed against him, and re-instate him as Prosecuting Inspector, or, alternatively, that a direction be issued to the State of Rajasthan to comply with the provisions of Article 320 of the Constitution and decide his petition after due consultation with the State Public Service Commission.

(3.) In reply it is contended on behalf of the opposite parties that the inquiry was conducted by the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Bikaner, in accordance with the rules laid down in Bikaner Police Manual, and that a statement summarising the alleged misconduct of the petitioner had been road out to him by the Deputy Inspector General of Police, and Ex. A was produced as such summary that was in fact read out to the petitioner. It was further contended that as the petitioner had admitted the charge read over to him, it was not necessary to frame any further charge under para. 59 of the Bikaner Police Rules, and that para. 57(b) only applied, and its provisions were duly complied with. It was further urged on behalf of the opposite parties that the appeal filed by the petitioner before the Administrator, Bikaner, was not competent, and that the Administrator could neither entertain the appeal nor decide it. in any event, it was contended that it was not necessary to consult the Public Service Commission in the case of the petitioner as he had not filed a proper appeal against the order of the Inspector General of Police, Bikaner, and as the order of the Administrator was without jurisdiction, and further there was no provision for review of the orders already passed in his case.