news details |
|
|
| Court quashes dismissal of lady Cop | | | EARLY TIMES REPORT
JAMMU, Nov: 24 (JNF):- A Division Bench of Jammu & Kashmir High Court Jammu Wing comprising Justice JP Singh and Justice Hasnain Massodi today upheld the portion of the judgment of writ Court whereby the appellant’s order removal of cop from service was set-aside and the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service forthwith.
In a petition filed by Nilofar, a constable in the Jammu & Kashmir Police who was removed from service by the Senior Superintendent of Police, Srinagar, for unauthorized absence from duty. COP filed appeal in the High Court the Single Judge set aside orders dated June 24, 2008 and November 11, 2008 the Senior Superintendent of Police and Deputy Inspector General of Police, Srinagar-Kashmir, directing respondent’s re-instatement forthwith, with no entitlement to salary for the period of absence, finding that the dismissal was illegal, in the absence of any enquiry into the Misconduct. Aggrieved by the judgment dated May 20, 2010 of the Single Judge, the State of Jammu and Kashmir has filed this Appeal.
The court after hearing the parties observed that On being asked as to whether the State-appellants had held any enquiry against the respondent before terminating her service, the appellants’ learned counsel fairly conceded that no such enquiry was held against the respondent. He, however, submitted that in case the dismissal of the respondent were to be set aside, the appellants be allowed liberty to proceed against her in accordance with the law for her Misconduct. Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that having failed to file Response to the Writ Petition and held that no enquiry into the alleged Misconduct of the respondent, liberty could not be allowed to the appellants because such a course would amount to unnecessary harassment of the respondent. DB considered the submissions of counsel for the parties and perused the Judgment impugned in the Appeal. The respondent’s dismissal from service, without holding requisite enquiry into her Misconduct, as required by rules governing the service, cannot be justified, for such a course additionally violates the principles of Natural Justice. The view taken by the Single Judge, in this regard, does not, warrant interference. DB, however, see no justification to refuse liberty to the appellants to proceed against the respondent afresh for her Misconduct after following the procedure laid-down in the rules therefore, governing the Service, for invalidity of the punishment for not following the rules, would not deprive the employer of his prerogative to proceed against the delinquent employee after following the rules and uphold that portion of the Judgment and Order of the Single Judge, whereby the appellants’ orders have been set aside and the respondent directed to be re-instated into service forthwith, DB permitted the State-appellants to proceed against the respondent for her Misconduct in accordance with law. Her entitlement or otherwise to salary for the period of absence from duty shall be determined by the appellants in accordance with the rules, depending on the result of the enquiry. This Appeal is, accordingly, disposed of on above terms.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
