Gurcharan Singh, Ex. A.S.I., Police vs The State of Haryana and Others

Amarjeet Chaudhary, J.—The petitioner is seeking direction to respondent No. 1 to treat him as in service till superannuation at the age of 58 years.

The facts of the case leading to the filing of the writ petition are that the Senior Superintendent of Police, Hissar, vide his order dated 27-8-1981 prematurely retired the petitioner and relieved him vide daily diary report No. 38, dated 28-7-1981. The petitioner filed representation before the Inspector General of Police, Haryana against the order of compulsory retirement which was accepted by him and it was observed that under Punjab Police Rules 9.18 a usual notice for three months is mandatory but the petitioner has been retired without complying with the aforesaid mandatory provisions. It was directed by the Inspector General of Police, Haryana, vide order dated 6-7-1982 that since the Government instructions and mandatory provisions of Rules have not been complied with, the petitioner be paid all the due to which he is entitled and asked the Deputy Inspector General of Police to fix responsibility for not complying with the mandatory provisions of P. P. R 9. 18 (1). The case of the petitioner is that as the mandatory provisions of P. P. R. were not complied with, it was incumbent upon the Inspector General of Police to have quashed the order of compulsory retirement.

I have considered the submission and am of the considered view that in the instant case usual notice of three months is mandatory under Punjab Police Rules 9.18. But the said course was not adopted. It was incumbent upon the respondents to either issue three mouths notice or to pay three month''s salary before passing order of compulsory retirement of the petitioner. Of the two courses referred to above neither was resorted to. As such order of premature retirement itself should have been quashed by the Inspector General of Police which admittedly was not done.

For the foregoing reasons, the order of compulsory retirement dated 28-7-1981 is quashed and this writ petition is allowed with costs. The petitioner will be deemed to be in service from the date of passing of the impugned order till his superannuation i. e. 30-4-1982. He will be entitled to all the consequential benefits. Arrears of pay etc. to be released within three months.

Costs are quantified at Rs. 500/-.