AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Anoop Chitkara, J
The petitioner, who was appointed as constable in Himachal Pradesh Police, has come up before this Court challenging his removal from service by the third respondent vide order dated 9.6.2020 Annexure P-1.
Notice. Mr. Adarsh Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General waives service and accepts notice on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3.
Mr. Ashish Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that without conceding and admitting, even if the statement of the victim, who appeared as PW-1 in Departmental Inquiry, is taken to be a gospel truth, then she admitted that the text messages sent by the petitioner had no indecent contents. Based on this, learned counsel submits that the penalty of removal from service is uncalled for and in the worst case scenario the punishment is highly disproportionate to the allegations.
Mr. Adarsh Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General submits that the petitioner has a right to file an appeal before appropriate authority challenging the order of his removal from service and that he cannot directly come to this Court seeking writ of mandamus.
Given the factual matrix of the case, this petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal before the appropriate authority within a week and we direct that in case the petitioner files the appeal before the concerned authority, the same shall be disposed of at the earliest. We also give liberty to the petitioner to file an application for stay of impugned order dated 9.6.2020 (Annexure P-1) before such authority. It is clarified that in case the petitioner still feels aggrieved by the order so passed by the appellate authority, he shall be at liberty to approach this Court again for redressal of his grievances. Pending application, if any, shall also stand disposed of.