Public servants cannot be dismissed without a departmental enquiry unless valid, recorded reasons justify the exception. The doctrine of pleasure is subordinate to constitutional protections, and bypassing mandatory disciplinary procedures without sufficient justification violates natural justice and renders the termination order legally unsustainable.

ORDER :

Deepak Khot, J.

The present petition has been filed by the petitioner for the following relief:

(1) To issue a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 26.08.2021 being illegal and arbitrary.

(2) To issue any other suitable directions/orders along with the cost of the petition.

2. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been terminated from the service by the impugned order dated 26.08.2021 (Annexure P/1). On appeal being filed against the said order, the same was dismissed, against which, a mercy appeal was filed, which was also dismissed by order dated 22.08.2024 (Annexure P/2).

3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the impugned order dated 26.08.2021 (Annexure P/1) has been passed without holding any departmental enquiry as provided under the Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1966 and the Police Regulations. The authority holding that the enquiry is not practicable in the matter applying the constitutional mandate of Article 311 (2) of the Constitution of India, has dismissed the petitioner from service. The petitioner was holding the post of Constable, who was suspended because of involvement in criminal activities. It is submitted that to show the grievousness of the conduct of the petitioner, various offences have been referred to in the impugned order, but, the fact remains that the petitioner has never been convicted in any of the offence registered against him. It is submitted that the petitioner was subjected to discrimination in the department and because of such act, the petitioner has been implicated in various criminal activities. The petitioner has been acquitted from various criminal cases registered against him and in some of the cases, trial is going on, but, it is submitted that in none of the matters, the petitioner has been convicted. Thus, prayed that any such order de-hors the rules dismissing the services of the petitioner against the constitutional mandate envisaged under Articles 309 and 311 of the Constitution of India is per se illegal and deserves to be quashed.

4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that though in the matter departmental enquiry has not been conducted for the reasons mentioned in the impugned order, but applying the constitutional principle of Article 311 (2) of the Constitution of India, the services of the petitioner have been terminated. On the basis, prayed that the order is absolutely in consonance of law and does not call for any interference by this Court.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

6. It is evident from the impugned order that the petitioner has neither been given any show cause notice nor any disciplinary enquiry has been initiated against the petitioner. The petitioner has not been given article of charges nor any such statement of imputation of charges for which the petitioner has been proceeded for the departmental punishment. The Articles 309 and 311 provide protection to the government employee from any unjust discrimination or departmental proceeding. Article 311(2) of the Constitution of India carves out exceptions to the ordinary rule wherein under three categories, the employer can terminate the service of the employee without following ordinary rule. The Exceptions have been provided in clauses (a), (b) and (c) to clause (3), which provide that the general rule of enquiry shall not apply to such employees who have been punished for conviction in a criminal case, wher