MAYLEN TOPNO Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is aggrieved of the order of dismissal dated 14.11.2014, which has been affirmed by the appellate authority by an order dated 03.06.2015. She has also challenged the communication contained in letter dated 14.05.2016 by which she has been informed that her memorial has been rejected on the ground of delay.

(2.) Rule 853 of the Jharkhand Police Manual provides that in case of dismissal, removal or reduction in rank the employee may prefer memorial or revision against the appellate order. It provides that a memorial against the appellate order shall be filed within 6 months after the date on which the officer submitting the memorial was informed of the order on appeal. The appellate order is dated 03.06.2015 and in the counter-affidavit the respondents have controverted the stand taken by the petitioner that her appeal was dismissed on the ground of delay, however, no where it has been disclosed by the respondents when the appellate order was communicated to the petitioner. The appellate order dated 03.06.2015 would also not reflect that it was sent to the petitioner from the office of the appellate authority. In the above facts, dismissal of her memorial on the ground that her petition was received after the period of limitation is arbitrary. Moreover, the Jharkhand Police Manual which has statutory force provides a forum for revision to an employee who has suffered penalty of dismissal, removal or reduction in rank and, therefore, normally memorial/revision under Rule 853 should not be dismissed on the ground of delay.

(3.) In the above facts, finding serious infirmity in the order rejecting memorial of the petitioner as communicated to her through letter dated 14.05.2016, it is quashed. The writ petition is allowed.