Sultan Singh vs State Of Haryana - 2006 Supreme(P&H) 4545

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2006 Supreme(P&H) 4545

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
JAGMOHAN BANSAL
Sultan Singh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Haryana – Respondent

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Aditya Yadav, Advocate with Mr. Atul Bhardhwaj, Advocate
For the Respondent: Mr. Ravi Pratap Singh, DAG, Haryana with Mr. Akshit Pathania, AAG, Haryana

JUDGMENT :

JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J.

1. The petitioners through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India are seeking setting aside of order dated 11.12.2003 whereby Inspector General of Police, Ambala Range, Ambala has enhanced the punishment awarded by disciplinary authority.

2. The petitioners belong to Haryana Police Force. In 2001, they were posted at Police Post, Titram, District Kaithal. In the intervening night of 05/06.12.2001, Deputy Superintendent of Police checked Naka Titram at 01:30 A.M. The petitioners were present on duty. Two-three trucks were lying parked there. The DSP asked reason for standing at Naka from one driver who disclosed that policemen are demanding Rs.200/- from each driver. The petitioners were placed under suspension. They were subjected to departmental inquiry wherein they were found guilty. The disciplinary authority vide order dated 16.07.2003 awarded them punishment of forfeiture of one increment with permanent effect. They preferred appeals before Appellate Authority which issued them show cause notice proposing punishment of dismissal from service. The notice was issued in exercise of power conferred by Rule 16.28 of Punjab

Click Here to Read the rest of this document