JUDGMENT

JUDGMENT :— After hearing the learned counsel for both the parties and on consideration of the question of law involved in this petition, Special Leave is granted. Arguments heard.

2. The appellant petitioner was appointed as a lady constable in Hoshiarpur District on 7-5-1979. After completion of training she was posted in March, 1980 in the police lines, Hoshiarpur. The Superintendent of Police, Hoshiarpur discharged the appellant from service by an order dated 9-9-1980 under R. 12.21, Volume 7 of the Punjab Police Rules, 1934. The said Order is in the following terms :-

"Lady Constable Rajinder Kaur No. 732 is unlikely to prove an efficient police officer. She is, therefore, hereby discharged from the Police Force under P. P. R. 12.21 With effect from today (9-9-1980).

Issue orders in O. R. and all concerned to notice and necessary action."

3. This order was made, it has been stated in the petition, without serving any charge-sheet on her and without asking her to explain any charge. The order also has not recorded any reason for her discharge from service. Against this order the appellant made a representation to the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Jullunder Range. The said representation was rejected on 17-10-1980. The appellant filed a revision against the order of the Deputy Inspector General of Police and the same was also dismissed on 15-4-1981. The appellant thereafter filed a Civil Suit No. 327/ASSJ/82 in the Court of Additional Senior Sub-Judge, Hoshiarpur on 16-11-1981 challenging the order of discharge as bad, arbitrary and against the principles of law. The said suit was dismissed by the Additional Senior Sub-Judge, Hoshiarpur on 28-2-1983. Thereafter, the appellant filed an appeal before the District Judge, Hoshiarpur on 31-10-1983 and it was numbered as Civil Appeal No. 45 of 1983. The said appeal was dismissed on 7-5-1984 and the judgment of the trial Court was confirmed. A Regular Second Appeal No. 2198 of 1984 was filed before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. The said Second appeal was dismissed on 10-10-1984. Hence the instant application for grant of special leave to appeal under Art. 136 of the Constitution has been filed in this Honourable Court by the appellant.

4. The main argument advanced on behalf of the appellant is that the impugned order of discharge from service was made not in accordance with R. 12.21 of the Punjab Police Rules, 1934 in accordance with the terms and conditions of the service but it was made by way of punishment. An enquiry was made by Deputy Police Superintendent, Garhshankar as to the character of the appellant into the allegation that she stayed at Mahalpur for 1 or 2 nights with one constable, Jaswant Singh and evidences were recorded therein without giving the appellant any opportunity of hearing in the enquiry and without giving her any opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses and the impugned order was made after the completion of the investigation on the ground of her misconduct which cast a stigma on her service career. The order in question is, therefore, not an innocuous one though expressed in innocuous terms. It is made by way of punishment, the ground being her misconduct as found on the basis of the investigation of certain allegations behind her back.

5. It was urged on behalf of the respondents that the order discharging the appellant from service was not made by way of punishment. The order was made in accordance with the terms of R. 12.21 of the said Rules which empowers the authorities to do away with the service of the constable at any time within three years of her enrolment, if she is found unlikely to prove an efficient police officer, by the Superintendent of Police and no appeal has been provided for under the Rules against the said order of discharge. It was, therefore, urged that the order being made in accordance with the conditions of service of the appellant and so it is unchallengeable before this Court by filing a spe