High Court Punjab-Haryana High Court

State Of Punjab And Others vs A.S.I. Pritam Singh on 18 December, 2009

Punjab-Haryana High Court
State Of Punjab And Others vs A.S.I. Pritam Singh on 18 December, 2009
IN THE HIGH COURT    FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB
        AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.


                                          RSA 3053 of 2009
                                          Date of decision:- 18.12.2009

State of Punjab and others
                                                         appellants

                         vs

A.S.I. Pritam Singh

                                                         Respondent

Present:    Mr. NS Pawar, Addl.A.G. Pb
            Mr. SS Swaich, Advocate.


M.M.S.BEDI,J.

The plaintiff- respondent had filed a suit for declaration and
permanent injunction challenging the penalty imposed upon him after
holding an inquiry under the Punjab Police Rules. The trial court had
dismissed the suit whereas the lower appellate court had partly decreed
the suit of the plaintiff- respondent holding that so far as the order of
punishment dated 14.4.1998 against the plaintiff- respondent is
concerned, it is appropriate to the extent of directing of stoppage of one
annual increment but so far as the punishment of forfeiture of one year’s
approved service permanently is concerned, it was set aside being illegal
and contravention to the service rules.

Learned State counsel has vehemently contended that the suit
of the plaintiff- respondent, being not within limitation and silent about any
statutory irregularity, ought to have been dismissed in toto.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties, I am of the
opinion that the finding of fact has been given by the lower appellate court
that the punishment of forfeiture of one year’s approved service
permanently is not prescribed under the rules and that the punishment of
stoppage of one increment gives a recurring cause of action every month.
No ground is made out for interference in the judgment and decree passed
by the lower appellate court, as no substantial question of law arises.

Dismissed.

December 18 ,2009                                  (M.M.S.BEDI)
TSM                                                    JUDGE