Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2008 DIGILAW 729 (ALL)

DEEP SINGH CONSTABLE NO 114 C P v. STATE OF U P

2008-03-31

ARUN TANDON

body2008
ARUN TANDON, J. ( 1 ) PETITIONER who are two in number are employed as constable in Civil Police of the State of U. P. They are aggrieved by an order passed by the Senior Superintendent of Police, Agra dated 13. 3. 2008 where under in exercise of power under Rule 8 (2) (b) of the Uttar Pradesh Police Officers of the Subordinate Ranks (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1991 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules, 1991), a decision has been taken to dispense with the departmental enquiry and to dismiss the petitioner as has been noticed. ( 2 ) COUNSEL for the petitioner with reference to the judgment of this Court in the case of Raghunath Singh v. State of U. P. and others, 2007 1 ADJ 143 as well as in view of the Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of state of U. P. and others v. Chandrika Prasad, 2006 1 ESC 374 contends that no reason recorded for arriving at a conclusion that it was practically impossible to hold an enquiry in respect of the charge as noticed in the order. In absence of reasons the impugned order cannot be legally sustained. ( 3 ) STANDING Counsel on behalf of the State respondents submits that in the facts of the case, it would be in the fitness of things that the impugned order may be quashed and the matter may be remanded to the authority concerned to hold the departmental enquiry and to pass an order in a time bound manner. Counsel for the parties agree that the writ petition be disposed of at this stage of the proceedings without calling for any affidavits. ( 4 ) FROM the impugned order it is apparently clear that absolutely no reasons have been recorded for the conclusion arrived that it was not practically possible to hold departmental enquiry on the charge as noticed against the petitioner in the impugned order. Reasons are links between the facts and the findings recorded. In absence of reasons the order passed cannot be legally justified. The Honble Supreme Court in the case of S. N. Mukherjee v. Union of india, AIR 1990 SC 1984 has held that recording of reasons in an order which visit a party with evil civil consequences, is one of the principles of natural justice and in absence thereto the order cannot be sustained. The Honble Supreme Court in the case of S. N. Mukherjee v. Union of india, AIR 1990 SC 1984 has held that recording of reasons in an order which visit a party with evil civil consequences, is one of the principles of natural justice and in absence thereto the order cannot be sustained. Even otherwise under the provision of rule 8 (2) (b) of Rules, 1991 such reason have necessarily to be recorded in writing. This Court has no hesitation to record that the order dated 13. 3. 2008 fails to satisfy the said requirements of law. Accordingly the order dated 13. 3. 2008 is hereby quashed. ( 5 ) HOWEVER it is provided that the Senior Superintendent of Police, Agra shall hold an enquiry into the alleged misconduct as noticed in the impugned order against the petitioner strictly in accordance with the procedure prescribed by law. The enquiry proceedings shall be completed and final orders may be passed within three months, thereafter. Writ petition stands allowed subject to the observations made herein above. Petition Allowed. .