ORDER :

By way of instant petition, petitioner has prayed for the following substantive reliefs:-

(i) That the order dated 22.05.2019 passed by respondent No.3 and order dated 17.10.2019 passed by respondent No.2 may kindly be quashed and set aside.

(ii) That the respondents be directed to refund the recovery as made by the respondent and to grant all benefit due to the petitioner.

2. Petitioner has preferred the petition on the premise that he is working as Head constable with the Police Department of State of Himachal Pradesh. His initial appointment was as constable and he was promoted to the present post by virtue of his merit. As per petitioner, he has an excellent career which has been free from any complaints, allegations and insinuations.

3. Petitioner has alleged that he was framed in false charges, on the basis of which a departmental inquiry was conducted against him. The inquiry was dropped by the Commandant 1st HPAP Battalion, Junga, District Shimla, H.P., vide order dated 16.07.2018. As per petitioner, he made a representation to the Director General of Police, Police Headquarters, Himachal Pradesh, Shimla, through proper channel, seeking promotion to the Higher rank, but instead the Inspector General of Police issued a notice dated 18.03.2019, to petitioner under Rule 16.28 of the Punjab Police Rules, 1934, requiring petitioner to show cause why enhanced punishment be not awarded to him. Despite having shown cause by the petitioner, Inspector General of Police vide order dated 22.05.2019, reviewed the order passed by the Commandant 1st HPAP Battalion, Junga, and imposed penalty of reduction in pay by upto 03 stages in the time scale for a period not exceeding 03 years.

4. Petitioner filed an appeal against the above noticed order passed by Inspector General of Police, Armed Police & Training, Himachal Pradesh. The appeal of petitioner was dismissed by the Director General of Police, Himachal Pradesh, vide order dated 17.10.2019.

5. Aggrieved against the order dated 22.05.2019, passed by Inspector General of Police and affirmed by Director General of Police vide order dated 17.10.2019, petitioner has approached this Court by way of instant petition. According to petitioner, the impugned orders are not in conformity with law in as much as the provisions of 16.28 of Punjab Police Rules were not applicable in the case. It has specifically been stressed that Rules 16.28 provided power of review only where there is an award of punishment and order passed by the Commandant 1st HPAP Battalion, Junga, was in respect of closure of inquiry and thus it did not qualify to be an award. The impugned orders have also been alleged to be time barred, besides being perverse. It has been stated that there was no material on record to indict the petitioner. The impugned orders were motivated and were against the principle of nature justice.

6. Respondents have contested the claim of the petitioner. It is alleged that on 05.09.2017 to 7.09.2021 petitioner had absented himself from duty unauthorizedly. On 17.09.2017 at 5:40 p.m., he was found to be under influence of liquor while on duty, under such influence he made a telephone call to In-charge State C.I.D., Kangra, and misbehaved with him by using in-appropriate language. Petitioner was got medically examined and was found to have consumed alcohol. He again remained absent from his duties from 18.09.2017 to 19.09.2017.

7. Respondents have further submitted that a regular departmental inquiry was conducted against the petitioner under Rule 16.24 of Punjab Police Rules. The Inquiry Officer found the charges proved against petitioner.

8. The Commandant 1st HPAP Battalion, Junga, ordered the closure of inquiry against the petitioner by extending warning not to repeat such conduct in future.

9. The Inspector General of Police, Himachal Pradesh, in exercise the powers under Rule 16.28 of Punjab Police Rules and after affording due opportunity to petitioner reviewed the order passed by Commandant 1