SUDHIR AGARWAL
HRIDAYANAND – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF U. P. – Respondent
Hon’ble Sudhir Agarwal, J.—The petitioner has been terminated by the District Magistrate vide order dated 16.7.2004 in exercise of power under Section 10 of Village and Road Police Act, 1873 (hereinafter referred to as “Act, 1873”). He filed an appeal against the said order of termination, which has also been rejected by the Commissioner vide order dated 26.5.2007. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that no charge-sheet was issued to the petitioner and no regular enquiry was conducted against him before passing the impugned order of termination and, therefore, the same is illegal.
2. The submission is thoroughly misconceived. Village Chowkidar is a Policeman and is a village servant. His chief duty is to watch and ward the village in his charge. He is required to carry reports to the village Headman, to assist him in tracing offenders and to make arrest as authorized by law. He is responsible to the District Magistrate for due performance of his duties. He is not a whole time employee though is a village servant. He is not prohibited from cultivating land. However, he must reside in one of the villages, for which he is responsible and cannot be employed on menial
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.