ORDER

The present petition has been filed against the orders dated 14.03.2014 and 24.06.2014 (Annexure P/1 and P/2). By the order Annexure P/1 dated 14.03.2014, the earlier punishment of dismissal from service awarded to the petitioner has been recalled and the punishment is converted to fine of Rs.

5000/- and the period of termination has been converted into "no work no pay".

By order Annexure P/2 appeal against the said order has been rejected by the Inspector General of Police.

2. Learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner has stated that the petitioner was subjected to departmental proceeding as well as criminal proceedings in relation to a single event that happened on 22.03.2009 wherein it is alleged that the petitioner has stopped a Scorpio Vehicle and got it parked in Police Station Narsinghpur but he did not undertake any further legal action thereafter and thus, exhibited his corrupt conduct. It was alleged against the petitioner that he demanded and taken a bribe of Rs. 2000/- from the owner of the vehicle for releasing the said vehicle from the unauthorized custody of police station.

3. Learned senior counsel further submits that after conducting departmental enquiry, the petitioner was dismissed from service vide order Annexure P/3 dated 25.11.2011. The petitioner was also subjected to criminal proceeding and criminal trial under Section 7, 13(1)(d) and 13 (2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 culminated in acquittal of the petitioner as well as the Constable who was co-accused along with the petitioner in S.T. No. 2/10 vide judgment dated 29.08.2012 decided by Special Court (PC Act) Narsinghpur.

4. As per learned Senior Counsel the charges against the petitioner in the criminal trial as narrated in para 5 of the judgment Annexure P/4 are the same which were the charges against the petitioner in the departmental proceedings.

Hence, after being acquitted in criminal case, the petitioner filed W.P. 67/14 before this court wherein vide order Annexure P/7 this Court directed the State authorities to decide the representation of the petitioner submitted for reinstatement pursuant to acquittal in criminal case.

5. The said representation was accordingly decided and vide Annexure P/1, the order of punishment was reviewed and petitioner was reinstated in service, however, punishment was reduced to fine of Rs. 5000/- and the period of termination was converted in "no work no pay".

6. It is argued on behalf of the petitioner that once the charges in criminal case and departmental enquiry were the same, the respondents were not having liberty to award even a minor punishment to the petitioner. It is further argued that as per clause 214 of M.P. Police Regulations, fine is not defined as punishment. Lastly, it is argued that in any event the period of termination could not be converted in "no work no pay" without arriving at a conclusion and passing an appropriate orders in terms of FR-54.

7. Per contra, it is argued by counsel for the State that the case of the petitioner has been properly dealt with and the period of termination cannot be calculated for any purpose and it has been converted into "no work no pay"

which is just and proper. It is further argued that there is a slight difference in the charges in Departmental Enquiry and the charges in criminal trial.

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

9. Firstly the argument advanced on behalf of the petitioner was taken up that as per clause 214 of M.P. Police Regulations, there is no provisions to award punishment of fine, hence, the punishment should be quashed on this ground alone. A perusal of the clause 214 of M.P. Police Regulations does not enumerate fine as punishment. However, Clause 215 of the Police Regulation provides special provision for police officers upto the rank of Inspector. Clause 215(a) provides that fine may be imposed on an officer from Constable to Inspector of amount not exceeding one month