Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

POORAN CHANDRA versus INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Pooran Chandra v. Inspector General of Police & Others - WRIT - A No. 27858 of 2004 [2005] RD-AH 3391 (22 September 2005)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Court No. 26

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.   27858  Of   2004

Pooran Chand...................................................................................................Petitioner

Versus

Inspector General of Police,

P.A.C. Western Zone, Moradabad & others................................................Respondents

Hon'ble Ashok Bhushan, J.

Heard counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel.

By this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 31.3.1997 passed by the Inspector General of Police P.A.C. Western Zone, Moradabad rejecting the representation of the petitioner filed against the appellate order dated 26.8.1996 passed by the  Deputy Inspector General P.A.C. Agra by which order the appeal of the petitioner against the order dated 3.1.1996 of the Commandant  P.A.C. 15th Bn. P.A.C.  Agra was rejected.  Proceedings under U.P. Subordinate Ranks Police Officers ( Punishment & Appeal ) Rules, 1991 were initiated.  The petitioner was given a show cause notice and an inquiry was  also held in which statements of certain  officers and employees were recorded.  The Commandant  found three allegations  of  indiscipline proved against the petitioner and passed minor punishment of censure.  Petitioner's appeal  and the revision against the said order was rejected by the Deputy  Inspector General P.A.C. Agra and the Inspector General of Police  P.A.C. Western Zone,  Moradabad.  Learned counsel for the petitioner challenging the order contended  that no inquiry was held and the petitioner was not given an opportunity.

I have considered the submission and  perused the record.

From the order of the Commandant it is clear that the inquiry was conducted in which  inquiry  the petitioner was also called and the statements of witnesses were recorded .  The petitioner was made aware of the allegations.  The petitioner himself also filed a copy of the grounds of appeal submitted to the appellate authority.  From the ground no. 1 of the appeal it is clear that the petitioner has submitted his explanation on 27.12.1995 against the show cause notice dated 11.12.1995.  Petitioner having been given show cause notice to which he also replied, the submission of the petitioner that no opportunity was given, cannot be accepted.  All the three authorities  have recorded concurrent  finding of fact that the charges of indiscipline have been proved against the petitioner.  One of the allegations against the petitioner was that  he occupied the government quarter in Block No. 84/3 which was allotted to another constable Raj Kumar Gautam  without there being any allotment order  and on displeasure being shown  by the authorities  he himself vacated the said quarter.  All the three authorities  have recorded findings to the effect that all the charges of indiscipline  were proved against the petitioner.  I do not find any infirmity in the order warranting  interference by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.  Moreover, only  punishment of censure which is minor punishment , has been awarded against the petitioner  which do not warrant any interference.

The writ petition  lacks merit and is summarily dismissed.

D/-22.9.2005

SCS    


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.