Back
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU
RAJESH SEKHRI
Dilshada Begum – Appellant
Versus
State of J&K – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Petitioner has invoked writ jurisdiction of this Court, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 103 of the Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir for quashment of her disengagement order and consequent reinstatement and release of her wages.
2. As factual narration of the present case, from pleadings of the parties would unfurl, petitioner came to be engaged as a Special Police Officer (SPO) vide order no. 369 of 2013 with belt no. 327 on 08.06.2013 on a consolidated honorarium of Rs. 3,000/- per month. After about five months, she came to be disengaged from the roll of SPO of District Ramban with immediate effect by Senior Superintendent of Police, Ramban-respondent no. 4 vide order no. 805 of 2013 dated 12.11.2013.
3. Case of the petitioner is that SPOs are appointed under rules 18 and 19 of the Police Manual and they have the same powers, privileges and protection, as enjoyed by an ordinary officer of police force. It is allegation of the petitioner that she came to be disengaged by the respondents with a single stroke of pen, on the basis of false and frivolous allegations, without any enquiry and in violation of principles of natural justice, as
Disengagement of a Special Police Officer without inquiry or notice violates principles of natural justice and is unconstitutional.
Special Police Officers do not have the same protections as regular police officers, and principles of natural justice do not necessitate an inquiry in cases of unauthorized absence.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to follow the prescribed procedure in departmental enquiries and the inapplicability of delay and laches in challenging a disengage....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the significance of affording an opportunity of hearing to an employee before taking adverse administrative action, in line with the principles ....
The importance of impeccable conduct for employment in the police department and the applicability of government orders for regularization based on specific conditions.
Disengagement of an individual without due process violates the right to fair hearing under natural justice principles, necessitating quash of the order.
Acquittal in a criminal trial does not confer automatic rights to reinstatement for daily wage employees, as their employment lacks vested rights.
A discharge order that is stigmatic and punitive in nature must be preceded by a proper inquiry and an opportunity for the employee to defend themselves, as mandated by principles of natural justice ....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
