JUDGMENT

Alok Kumar Verma, J. - This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of certiorari to set aside the judgment and order dated 07.12.2018 passed by the Public Services Tribunal, Uttarakhand at Dehradun (hereinafter referred to as, "Tribunal") in Claim Petition No.46/SB/2018, "Sunil Panwar vs. State of Uttarakhand and others" along with order dated 14.10.2020 in Review Application No.06/SB/2020, order dated 21.06.2017 passed by the respondent no.4 and order dated 06.02.2018 passed by the respondent no.3.

2. In order to appreciate the issues involved in this writ petition, the relevant facts need mentioned infra.

3. The facts, to the limited extent necessary, are that the petitioner is a Sub-Inspector in civil police in the Uttarakhand Police. In the year, 2016, when the petitioner was posted at Police Station Sahaspur, a Case Crime No.180 of 2016 under Section 279 and Section 338 I.P.C. was registered against unknown driver of the motorcycle, bearing registration number HP17A-5663. The investigation was handed over to the petitioner. The accused was arrested on 09.08.2016 and the technical inspection of the said vehicle was conducted on 21.08.2016. The petitioner was transferred from the Police Station Sahaspur to the Police Station Vikasnagar on 07.10.2016. The petitioner was Investigating Officer of that case till 07.10.2016, but, during this period, he never attempted to record the statements of the informant, his injured mother and the doctor, whereas, the F.I.R. disclosed that the treatment of the injured, mother of the informant, was going on in Mahant Indresh Hospital. The injured died on the next day of the incident. But, the petitioner did not add the relevant Section 304A I.P.C.

4. After preliminary enquiry, a show cause notice dated 18.05.2017 was issued by the Senior Superintendent of Police, Dehradun, respondent no.4, to the petitioner as to why the censure entry be not given to him as a minor penalty under "The Uttar Pradesh Police Officers Of The Subordinate Ranks (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1991 (hereinafter referred to as, "the Rules, 1991")(as applicable in the State of Uttarakhand under provisions of the U.P. Reorganization Act, 2000).

5. The petitioner submitted the reply to the show cause notice on 12.06.2017 and denied the said charge.

6. Senior Superintendent of Police, Dehradun, respondent no.4, considered the reply to show cause notice and did not find the same satisfactory. He found the petitioner guilty and awarded minor penalty of censure entry on 21.06.2017.

7. The petitioner filed an appeal against the punishment order, which was rejected by the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Garhwal Region, respondent no.3, on 06.02.2018.

8. The petitioner filed the claim petition before the Tribunal for seeking the following relief:-

(i) To quash the impugned punishment order dated 21.06.2017 (Annexure No.A-1) passed by the respondent no.3 and impugned appellate order dated 06.02.2018 (Annexure No. A-2) passed by the respondent no.3 along with its operation & effects with all consequential benefit.

(ii) To issue an order or direction to the respondents to delete the endorsement of censure entry from the character roll of the petitioner.

(iii) To award the cost of the petition to the petitioner.

(iv) To award the cost of petition.

9. After hearing both the parties, the Tribunal dismissed the claim petition and held that the enquiry was based on evidence and there was no mala fide or perversity. The petitioner was given reasonable opportunity to defend himself and there is no violation of any rule, law or principles of natural justice in the enquiry proceedings conducted against the petitioner. The Tribunal observed that the petitioner participated in the preliminary enquiry. The Enquiry Officer has taken statements of all the relevant witnesses including the petitioner. The preliminary enquiry was based on statements and documents related to the allegations. On the basis of substantial evidence, the Enquiry Office