State of Punjab and anr. Vs. Asi Balkar Singh - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/671487
SubjectService
CourtSupreme Court of India
Decided OnDec-13-2001
Case NumberCivil Appeal No. 3466 of 2002
Judge S. Rajendra Babu and; Ruma Pal, JJ.
Reported in(2002)10SCC171
AppellantState of Punjab and anr.
RespondentAsi Balkar Singh
DispositionAppeal allowed
Excerpt:
- [ s. rajendra babu and; ruma pal, jj.] -- service law — departmental enquiry — punishment — competent authority — appointing authority — on facts found that respondent was promoted as assistant sub-inspector by an order passed by superintendent of police (sp) as affirmed by the deputy inspector general (dig) -- a perusal of the records will clearly indicate that the order of promotion was passed by the superintendent of police and the deputy inspector general had only affirmed that order appointing him as assistant sub-inspector. the order made by the high court affirming the decree made by the trial court as affirmed by the first appellate court is set aside and the suit filed by the respondent shall stand dismissed.s. rajendra babu and; ruma pal, jj.1. a suit was filed by the respondent who is assistant sub-inspector in the police department of the appellants for a declaration that the order forfeiting two years' approved service is illegal on the ground that the senior superintendent of police has no jurisdiction to pass this order.2. the trial court proceeded on the basis that the respondent had been appointed as a constable and later on he was promoted to the rank of assistant sub-inspector pursuant to the order made by the deputy inspector general of police, ferozepur and therefore, he was the appointing authority and hence he alone could have passed the order in question. on that basis it passed a decree in this suit declaring that the said order is null and void, set aside the same and held.....
Judgment:

S. Rajendra Babu and; Ruma Pal, JJ.

1. A suit was filed by the respondent who is Assistant Sub-Inspector in the Police Department of the appellants for a declaration that the order forfeiting two years' approved service is illegal on the ground that the Senior Superintendent of Police has no jurisdiction to pass this order.

2. The trial court proceeded on the basis that the respondent had been appointed as a Constable and later on he was promoted to the rank of Assistant Sub-Inspector pursuant to the order made by the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Ferozepur and therefore, he was the appointing authority and hence he alone could have passed the order in question. On that basis it passed a decree in this suit declaring that the said order is null and void, set aside the same and held that he is entitled to all consequential benefits. The matter was carried in appeal.

3. The learned District Judge in the first appeal and the High Court in the second appeal considered the matter but affirmed the order made by the trial court.

4. A perusal of the records will clearly indicate that the order of promotion was passed by the Superintendent of Police and the Deputy Inspector General had only affirmed that order appointing him as Assistant Sub-Inspector. Therefore, it could not be said that the Senior Superintendent of Police was not competent to pass the order of punishment in question. The fact that the Superintendent of Police is competent to pass such an order is also clear from the decision of this Court in State of Punjab v. Manohar Lal1.

5. The order made by the High Court affirming the decree made by the trial court as affirmed by the first appellate court is set aside and the suit filed by the respondent shall stand dismissed. This appeal is allowed accordingly.