Allowed¶25

Jangir Singh v. State of Punjab & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC7 Nov 2025CWP/1175/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CWP-1175-2017, High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh, Jagmohan Bansal, J. (oral), 07.11.2025 — writ petition under Articles 226/227 by Jangir Singh against State of Punjab; challenge to show cause notice dated 19.12.2016 for dismissal from post of Constable in District Police; erroneous grant of 16 height marks instead of maximum 15 raised score to 28 instead of 27; no misrepresentation, fraud or connivance by petitioner; petitioner served since 2011, initially in PAP, transferred through proper channel; interim orders kept him in District Police; discharge at belated stage held inappropriate; show cause notice set aside, petition allowed.

What did the court decide?

Setting aside of the show cause notice dated 19.12.2016; the petitioner is not to be discharged or dismissed from District Police. ¶25

Jangir Singh Vs State of Punjab & Ors. — Writ and Judicial Review | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Setting aside of the show cause notice dated 19.12.2016; the petitioner is not to be discharged or dismissed from District Police.

¶25

Issue for consideration

Whether the show cause notice dated 19.12.2016 calling upon the petitioner to show cause for dismissal from the post of Constable ought to be set aside. +1 more

¶11

Court's answer

The petition deserves to be allowed; the impugned show cause notice dated 19.12.2016 is set aside.

¶25

Ratio / Principle

It is undisputed that the petitioner was actually holding the post of Constable in PAP, applied through proper channel, and there was no misrepresentation, fraud or connivance on his part; the excess height mark was granted by mistake of the respondent.

¶19

Key takeaways

This Court does not find it appropriate to permit the respondent to discharge the petitioner at this belated stage, especially when there was no lapse on his part and he was already working as Constable with PAP; dismissal now, when he could not revert to PAP, would ruin his personal and family life without his fault.ratio¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition (CWP-1175-2017, decided 07.11.2025) under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India challenging show cause notice dated 19.12.2016 proposing dismissal of the petitioner from the post of Constable in District Police. The petitioner, already serving as Constable in PAP, had applied through proper channel pursuant to advertisement dated 11.09.2010, was selected, discharged from PAP and joined District Police. Selection authorities had mistakenly awarded him 16 height marks where the maximum for height of 6 feet or above was 15, inflating his total to 28 instead of 27. Held: there being no misrepresentation, fraud or connivance on the part of the petitioner, who was actually holding the post of Constable in PAP and serving since 2011, and dismissal at this belated stage — when he could not rejoin PAP — would ruin his personal and family life without any fault of his, it is not appropriate to permit the respondent to discharge him. Show cause notice dated 19.12.2016 set aside; petition allowed; pending applications disposed of.

¶1

**IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ******

¶2

202 CWP-1175-2017 Date of Decision: 07.11.2025

¶3

JANGIR SINGH ...Petitioner

¶4

Vs.

¶5

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. …Respondents

¶6

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL

¶7

Present:Mr. Pardeep Kumar, Advocate

¶8

for the petitioner

¶9

Mr. Puru Jarewal, DAG, Punjab ***

¶10

JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (ORAL)

¶11

The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking setting aside of show cause notice dated 19.12.2016 whereby he was called upon to show cause as to why he should not be dismissed from the post of Constable.

¶12

The petitioner pursuant to Advertisement applied for the post of Constable in 2010. He was selected. He joined Punjab Police Force (in short ‘PAP’) on 15.03.2011. The respondent vide advertisement dated 11.09.2010 invited applications for the post of Constable in District Police. The petitioner applied for the post through proper channel. He was discharged so that he may join District Police. He joined District Police. The respondent issued show cause notice dated 19.12.2016 calling upon him to show cause as to why he should not be dismissed

¶13

DEEPAK BISSYAN 2025.11.07 17:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-1175-2017

-2-

from service.

Learned State counsel submits that maximum marks to be awarded for height of 6 feet or above were 15 and petitioner by mistake was awarded 16 marks. His total score became 28 instead of 27. With the score of 27, he was not eligible for the post. It was mistake on the part of authorities and petitioner cannot take benefit of mistake of the authority.

¶18

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶19

It is undisputed that petitioner at the time of filing application for the post of Constable in District Cadre was working as Constable with PAP. He applied through proper channel and came to be selected. He was discharged by PAP and joined District Police. PAP and District Police are two different cadres of Punjab Police. The respondent by mistake granted him 16 marks for height instead of 15 marks. There was no misrepresentation or fraud or connivance on the part of petitioner. He was actually holding post of Constable in PAP. He is working with Police Force since 2011. On account of interim orders passed by this Court, he is still working with District Police. Had respondent rejected his claim at the first instance, he would have remained part of PAP. If at this stage, he is dismissed from District Police, he would not be able to join PAP. It would ruin his personal and family life without his fault.

¶20

In the backdrop, this Court does not find it appropriate to permit the respondent to discharge petitioner, at this belated stage,

¶21

DEEPAK BISSYAN 2025.11.07 17:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶22

CWP-1175-2017

¶23

-3-

¶24

especially when there was no lapse on his part and he was already working as Constable with PAP.

¶25

For the reasons assigned above, the instant petition deserves to be allowed accordingly allowed. Impugned show cause notice dated 19.12.2016 is hereby set aside.

¶26

Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of.

¶27

(JAGMOHAN BANSAL) JUDGE

¶28

November 07, 2025

¶29

Deepak DPA

¶30

Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No

¶31

DEEPAK BISSYAN 2025.11.07 17:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Jangir Singh v. State of Punjab & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jangir Singh v. State of Punjab & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gurmail Singh Vs State of Pb and Others

Parmanand Sharma Vs State of Hy. & Ors.

Guravtar Singh Vs Ut Chandigarh and Others

Aasma Grover Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Jai Parkash Vs State of Haryana and Others

Anuj Mahajan Vs State of Haryana & Anr.