S. R. BRAHMBHATT, J.

( 1 ) HEARD Mr. I. S. Supehia, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. D. S. Pandit, learned AGP for the respondent.

( 2 ) THE petitioner is serving as Unarmed Police constable in the city of Ahmedabad under the respondent. The petitioner was convicted for an offence under section 498-A of the I. P. Code in Criminal Case No. 123 of 1987 by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad vide the judgment dated 30-6-1989 and was sentenced to undergo r. I. for one year and a find of Rs. 1000-00, in default thereof to suffer imprisonment for 2 months. The petitioner as it appears from the record has preferred criminal Appeal No. 407 of 1989, which according to the petitioner has been admitted and is pending for final disposal. The petitioner has been released on bail. 2. 1 the Deputy Police Commissioner, North Zone, ahmedabad City, issued a show cause notice on 17-3-1990 to the petitioner for passing appropriate order on the ground that the petitioner was convicted under the criminal case No. 123 of 1987 vide order dated 30-6-1989. The petitioner filed his reply to the same on 26-4-1990 and thereafter, the petitioner was also given personal hearing on 11-5-1990 as it is submitted by the petitioner. The petitioner, as stated in his petition, relying upon Rule 156 and Note thereto and also relying upon the circular dated 1-8-1966 Dy. Police Commissioner north Zone, vide order dated 22-5-1990 suspended the proposed punishment contained in his show cause notice dated 17-3-1990, till the decision of the criminal appeal no. 407 of 1989 filed by the petitioner before this court challenging the order of conviction and judgment dated 30-6-1989 in criminal Case No. 123 of 1987.

( 3 ) THE petitioner has further stated in his petition that the successor to the Dy. Police Commissioner, North zone, issued an order on 3-1-1994 revoking her predecessors order dated 22-5-1990, whereunder the proposed penalty of dismissal was suspended and the petitioner was ordered to be heard afresh on the earlier show cause notice. A memo came to be issued to the petitioner on 3-1-1994 requiring him to attend the office on 7-1-1994 for personal hearing in respect of the earlier show cause notice dated 17-3-1990. The petitioner had requested for adjournment which was granted to the petitioner.

( 4 ) BEING aggrieved and feeling dissatisfied with the order dated 3-1-1994 (Annexure-B) petitioner has preferred the present petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India.

( 5 ) THE petitioner has mainly contended that the impugned order dated 3-1-1994 ought not to have been passed in view of the fact that the petitioners criminal appeal no. 407 of 1989 against his conviction recorded in criminal case no. 123 of 1987 dated 30-6-1989 has been admitted by this Court, and the petitioner is released on bail. In support of his contention he relied on the note to the Rule 156 of Bombay Civil Services rules, and Government Circular dated 1-8-1966. petitioner has contended that in view of the note to the rule 156 of BCS Rules the impugned order dated 3-1-1994 could not have been issued and he further submitted that the earlier order dated 22-5-1990 passed by the then Dy. Police Commissioner was proper and the same ought not to have been revoked and the show cause notice dated 17-3-1990 ought not to have been revived. Learned counsel further submits that though it is true that the government Circular dated 1-8-1966 has been revoked as it is observed in the impugned ordered dated 3-1-1994, however the statutory Rule 156 has not been revoked and in view of the specific note below Rule-156 of BCS Rules the impugned order dated 3-1-1994 ought not to have been issued. The petitioner has further submitted that as per the instructions which he has annexed at Annexure-D also the show cause notice dated 17-3-1990 ought not to have been revived. The petitioner has also taken up a contention that the impugned order dated 3-1-1994 is passed by the respondent quas

Click Here to Read the rest of this document