JUDGMENT :

Sandeep Sharma, J.

1. SHO, police Station, Sadar, Shimla informed the Superintendent of Police, Shimla vide confidential letter dated 29.5.2005 that the Manager of the Hotel Chand, Shimla after having lost rupees 6-6½ thousands while gambling with 4-5 persons intimated petitioner No. 1 Sanjeev Kumar, who at that relevant time was posted as Head Constable at Inter-State Bus Terminal (ISBT), Shimla. Petitioner Head Constable, Sanjeev Kumar accompanied by other petitioners namely, MHC/HC Ashwani Kumar No. 139 and Constable Manoj Kumar No. 1390 visited the hotel at around 3 O'clock in the night and allegedly took into possession sum of Rs. 21000/- from all the 5-6 persons, who were allegedly gambling inside the room. SHO Police station, Sadar, Shimla in his aforesaid communication sent to Superintendent of Police, Shimla further informed that out of Rs. 21000/- petitioners returned 6-6½ thousand to the Manager of the hotel and sum of Rs. 200/- each to the other gamblers. Allegedly, all the three petitioners misappropriated sum of Rs. 14,500/-. SHO, Police station, Sadar, Shimla also informed that SHO, police Station, Dhalli informed him on the telephone that on 25.5.2005 he had nabbed a person accused of stealing a sum of Rs. 60,000/- who, during investigation revealed that he had gambled in the Chand hotel with the stolen money and at that time three police personnel had visited the place in the intervening night of 23rd/24th.5.2005 and they had taken away sum of Rs. 21,000/- from there. Though, SHO, Police station, Sadar questioned/inquired all the petitioners, who had allegedly visited the hotel after having received information, but since none of them admitted their guilt, matter came to the notice of Superintendent of Police, Shimla through confidential report submitted by the SHO, Sadar, Shimla. Superintendent of Police got preliminary inquiry conducted in the matter by Dy. S.P (City), Shimla, which revealed that all the petitioners named hereinabove raided the hotel Chand on the telephonic information given by its Manager Sh. Gabbar Singh with an intention to obtain wrongful gain. Officer responsible for conducting preliminary inquiry reported in its preliminary report that it appears that petitioners stood benefited by not conducting any proceedings against the accused persons as such, they neither reported the matter to the higher authorities nor made any entry in the daily diary report.

2. After having received aforesaid report of preliminary inquiry (Annexure A-9), Superintendent of Police, Shimla in terms of provisions contained under Rule 16.38 of Punjab Police Rules proceeded to initiate departmental inquiry against the petitioners after having obtained necessary permission from District Magistrate Shimla. Vide order dated 4.6.2005 (Annexure A-4), Superintendent of Police, Shimla suspended all the petitioners from service and thereafter vide order dated 17.6.2005 (Annexure A-5), appointed Sh. Virender Singh Kanwar, Additional Superintendent of Police City), Shimla as inquiry officer. Above named Inquiry Officer immediately after his being appointed as Inquiry Officer served the petitioners with a charge sheet (Annexure A-6), levelling therein following charges against them and called upon all the delinquent officials i.e. petitioners to submit their reply within seven days of the receipt of the charges as well as list of prosecution witnesses.

"Charges Sheet"

1. You namely HC Sanjeev Kumar No. 4 were posted as such in P.S. Sadar, Shimla on 23/24.5.2005. On the said night, you were on JDO duty. You alongwith HC Ashwani Kumar No. 139 and C. Manoj Kumar No. 1390 had gone to hotel Chand, Ganj Bazar from the P.S. on receiving phone call from there. But you failed to enter a report to this effect in the Daily Diary which you should have done as per the requirement of the rules. By doing so, you have committed violation of the Police rules.

2. You alongwith HC Ashwani Kumar No. 139 and C. Manoj Kumar No. 1390 went to