Petitioner challenged compulsory retirement order on grounds of having sufficient good reports under service instructions. Court held doubtful integrity entry barred eligibility and dismissed the petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
-1-
C.W.P. No. 24501 OF 2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB OF HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
C.W.P. No. 24501 OF 2011 DATE OF DECISION : 02.01.2012
Maha Singh …Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and others …Respondents
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH.
Present :Mr. Manoj Chahal, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (ORAL)
Prayer in this petition is for quashing of the order dated 14.12.2007 (Annexure P-3) passed by the Director General of Police, Haryana vide which the petitioner was compulsory retired.
It is the contention of the counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has more than 50% good reports in his career and 70% or above good reports during the last ten years of service and therefore, the impugned order cannot sustain. He contends that the order passed by the Director General of Police, Haryana, thus, deserves to be set aside. Reliance in support of his contention is placed on the instructions dated 19.11.1991 which deal with premature/compulsory retirement on attaining the age of 50/55 years of service.
I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and gone through the records.
As is apparent from the impugned order that for the period of 01.04.2001 to 31.03.2002, petitioner has been assessed with Integrity - Doubtful, Reliability – Unreliable, with further general remarks as follows:-
“ 3. General remarks – Vide his letter No.352/DSP/R/City dated 18.4.2001 it was reported by DSP/City, Sirsa that he
C.W.P. No. 24501 OF 2011
-2-
did not recover the 'weapon' from the accused person in the presence of any witness and no recovery memo prepared (case FIR No.110 dated 11-3-2001 U/S 323/506/24 IPC, PS City Sirsa). Recovery of weapon was not mentioned in the case diary to render help to the accused person. In this regard, he was awarded a punishment of censure vide No.100-01/SCN/Steno dated 10-8-2001.”
This is apart from other punishment imposed on him, which are six in number. Perusal of the instructions dated 19.11.1991 (Annexure P-4) reliance whereupon has been placed by the counsel for the petitioner apart from providing that it is essential for an employee to have earned at least 70 per cent or above reports during the last 10 years also that there is no entry of doubtful intigrity during this period. As the petitioner has doubtful integrity in the Annual Confidential Report relating to the period from 01.04.2001 to 31.03.2002 instruction would not help the case of the petitioner.
There is no illegality in the order passed by the Director General of Police, Haryana, which has been impugned in the present writ petition. Finding no merit in this petition. The same stands dismissed.
(AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH)
02.01.2012
adhikari
JUDGE
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a written complaint regarding doubtful integrity during the last ten years bar premature retirement and cure the petitioner's eligibility.
Maha Singh
State of Haryana
Augustine George Masih
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
