D.N. Patel, J.

I.A. No. 6712 of 2015

1. Present interlocutory application has been preferred under section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, for condonation of delay of 258 days in preferring this Letters Patent Appeal.

2. Having heard counsel for the both sides and looking to the reasons stated in the interlocutory application, especially in paragraph Nos. 5 to 10, it appears that there are reasonable grounds for condonation of delay.

3. In view of these facts, we hereby, condone the delay in preferring this Letters Patent Appeal. Accordingly, I.A. No. 6712 of 2015 is allowed and disposed of.

L.P.A. No. 722 of 2015

4. This Letters Patent Appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order, delivered by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(S) No. 6828 of 2012 dated 20th February, 2015 whereby, the writ petition preferred by respondent no.1 was allowed and the order of dismissal dated 30th April, 2012 and the appellate order dated 16th October, 2012 were quashed and set aside and the present appellants were directed to reinstate respondent no.1 with full back wages.

5. Factual Matrix

Public advertisement was issued on 13th January, 2004 and the applications were invited for the post of Constable by the State of Jharkhand.

Those, who were Home Guards they can also apply for the post in question. Last date of submission of application was 15th February, 2004.

Respondent no.1 (original petitioner) filled up the form and as per column 10 of the said application form there was need to annex certificate of Home Guard.

The respondent enrolled as a Home Guard and was getting his training.

The training period was of 45 days and during the course of training of Home Guards the respondent (original petitioner) filled up the form and submitted the same and instead of certificate of Home Guard, identity card of Home Guard was annexed.

The respondent cleared all types of tests and ultimately, was appointed on the post of Constable under the reserved seats for Home Guards.

As per Rule 663 of the Jharkhand Police Manual enacted under Section 7 to be read with Section 12 of the Police Act, 1861 for appointment on the post of Constable, Trained Home Guard can be appointed and if a candidate is Trained Home Guard there will be 50% reservation.

The training of the respondent (original petitioner) was going on as on last date of application i.e. on 15th February, 2004 and instead of certificate of Home Guard, identity card of Home Guard was annexed and got the benefit of 50% reservation quota.

When the identity card was sent for verification, it was found that the respondent (original petitioner) had never completed the training at all of Home Guard as on 15th February, 2004, which was the last date for preferring an application, for the post of Constable, in pursuance of the public advertisement dated 13th January, 2004.

Therefore, charge-sheet dated 24th June, 2011 was issued upon the respondent which is annexed at Annexure-3 to the memo of this L.P.A.

Thereafter, enquiry was conducted and after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the respondent ultimately, charges levelled against the respondent-delinquent employee were held as proved.

The disciplinary authority i.e. the Superintendent of Police, Hazaribagh dismissed the respondent from the services of police vide order dated 30th April, 2012 (Annexure-5 to the memo of this L.P.A.).

The respondent-delinquent employee preferred departmental appeal before the Deputy Inspector General, North Chotanagpur Range, Hazaribagh, who dismissed the appeal of the respondent vide order dated 16th October, 2012, which is at Annexure-6 to the memo of this LPA.

Hence, respondent no.1 (original petitioner) preferred writ petition being W.P.(S) No. 6828 of 2012 challenging the order of dismissal dated 30th April, 2012 (Annexure-5 to the memo of this L.P.A.) as well as the order, passed by the Appellate Authority dated 16th October, 2012 (Annexure-6 to the memo of this L.P.A.).

The writ petition was allowed by the lear