High Court Punjab-Haryana High Court

Kamal Gir vs State Of Punjab & Ors on 23 September, 2009

Punjab-Haryana High Court
Kamal Gir vs State Of Punjab & Ors on 23 September, 2009
       IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

                            CHANDIGARH.




                                      Civil Writ Petition No. 6904 of 2009

                           DATE OF DECISION : SEPTEMBER 23, 2009




KAMAL GIR

                                                       ....... PETITIONER(S)

                                VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.

                                                       .... RESPONDENT(S)



CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA



PRESENT: Mr. Gupreet Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner(s).
         Mr. BS Chahal, DAG, Punjab.


AJAI LAMBA, J. (Oral)

This petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of

India is directed against order dated 17.4.2009 (Annexure P-13)

whereunder the Commandant 13th Battalion, P.A.P., Chandigarh

(respondent No.3), has imposed the punishment of dismissal on the

petitioner, who was serving as a Constable.

The facts, as brought out, are that the petitioner had been

serving as a Special Police Officer in Police District Khanna with effect

from 20.10.1992. There were certain complaints against the petitioner of
Civil Writ Petition No. 6904 of 2009 2

being a habitual absentee. Be that as it may, the petitioner was discharged

from service of Special Police Officer with effect from 24.9.1995.

It seems that on 26.5.1997, the petitioner came to be

appointed as a Constable. It is the case of the respondents that if the

petitioner had not concealed the material fact viz. his discharge as Special

Police Officer, the petitioner would not have been considered for

appointment as Constable. When this fact came to light, a regular

departmental inquiry was initiated. The Inquiry Report, placed on record

as Annexure P-10, indicates that it has been concluded that the petitioner

had intentionally concealed the fact at the time of recruitment as

Constable, whereupon the impugned order (Annexure P-13) came to be

passed, after issuance of a show cause notice.

After arguing the matter for some time, learned counsel for

the petitioner wants to withdraw the petition to enable the petitioner to

take recourse to alternate remedies.

Dismissed as withdrawn.

September 23, 2009                                       ( AJAI LAMBA )
Kang                                                             JUDGE



1. To be referred to the Reporters or not?

2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?