Sunil Ambwani,

1. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.

2. The Special Appeals arise out of the judgments dated 1.10.2004 and 5.10.2004 passed by Hon'ble Mr.Justice Sunil Kumar Garg (as he then was) and Hon'ble Mr.Justice B.Prasad (as he then was) respectively, by which they have dismissed the writ-petitions against the orders dated 24.4.2001, by which the review petitions filed by the appellants-petitioners were rejected by the Governor of Rajasthan, to review the orders dated 10.6.1998 passed by the DIG Police, Jodhpur Range, Jodhpur rejecting the representations of the appellants-petitioners, 3.6.1981 by the Inspector General of Police, Rajasthan, Jaipur dismissing the appeal of the appellants-petitioners and 7.9.1978 passed by the Dy. Inspector General of Police, Jodhpur Range, Jodhpur, by which after a departmental enquiry under Rule 16 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1958 (for short, hereinafter referred to as “the Rules of 1958”), the appellants-petitioners were dismissed from service.

3. Shri Asgar Ali-appellant in Special Appeal No.253/06 and Shri Idan-appellant in Special Appeal No.12/05 were serving as Constable and Sub-Inspector, Police Station Desuri District Pali. They were placed under suspension and charge-sheeted on 24.9.1975 under Rule 16 of the Rules of 1958 on the charges as follows:-

“(a) Charges against Shri Asgar Ali

(i) That the petitioner was posted as Constable at the Police Station Desuri for the period from 2.3.1975 to 12.9.1975 and while he was posted as such, on 28.6.75, Lal Mohd. brought two men and three women having three small cloth bags with them and on the search being conducted by Sub Inspector Idan, 15 kgs. of contraband opium was found in them and said opium was misappropriated by Sub Inspector Idan and Sub Inspector Idan released the accused persons and thus, the present petitioner was also a party to the conspiracy fulfilling selfish motive and leaving the duty without taking any sort of permission and providing succor in disposition of illegal opium.

(ii) Not only that, thereafter, the petitioner without informing the higher authorities accompanied Sub Inspector Idan in a jeep and disbursed the contraband opium for illegal consideration and further more he did not inform about happenings of that incident to the higher authorities.

(b) Charges against Shri Idan

^^vkjksi la[;k ¼1½

;g gS fd vki Jh vkbZnku] rkjh[k 18-10-1973 ls 12-9-1975 rd Hkkjlk/kd inkf/kdkjh Fkkuk nslwjh fu;qDr jgsaA mDr in fu;qfDr dky 28-6-1975 dks fnukad enZ o rhu vkSjrks dks dkUlVscy yky eksgEen oxSjk ykdj vkids lkeus is’k fd;k ftudh uktk;t vQhe feykA ftlds eqrkfyd vkius dk;Zokgh tkCrk ugha dh o u vQhe tek eky [kkuk fd;k

4. The appellants-petitioners submitted reply to the charge-sheet and participated in the departmental enquiry. The disciplinary enquiry was held jointly alongwith the departmental enquiry against Head Constable Shri Bakhtawar Singh, FC-Shri Sultan Ahmed, FC-Shri Khuda Bux, FC Shri Lal Mohd., FC-Shri Govind Ram and FC-Shri Jeev Singh charged in the same incident. After conclusion of departmental enquiry, the Dy. Superintendent of Police, Circle Sojat District Pali submitted enquiry report holding the appellants-petitioners guilty of the charges. The charges against other police personnel were not found proved.

5. After considering the enquiry report, the Disciplinary Authority-Dy. Inspector General of Police, Jodhpur Range, Jodhpur issued a show cause notice to the appellants-petitioners on 24.5.1977 proposing the punishment of removal from service. A copy of the enquiry report was also sent to them alongwith the notice.

6. Both the appellants faced criminal prosecution on the registration of criminal case against them under sections 409, 217 and 225A IPC, in which the charges were framed on 1.9.1978.

7. The appellants made a request on 4.9.1978 to the DIG, Jodhpur Range, Jodhpur, to stay the departmental proceedings until the conc