Back
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL
SUKHBEG SINGH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS – Respondent
112
Service - Dismissal from Service - Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India - Sections 5, 6, 7 of the Punjab Civil Services (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1970
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner was dismissed from service and his revision petition was dismissed. The petitioner filed the present petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India seeking to set aside the orders of dismissal and dismissal of revision petition.
Finding of the Court:
The court observed that the issue involved in the present petition is no more res integra and is identical to the issue decided by the court in the case of Tarsem Chand v. State of Punjab and others. The court directed the appellate authority to re-consider the case of the petitioner in terms of the order dated 28.02.2024 passed in the Tarsem Chand case.
Issues: Whether the orders of dismissal from service and dismissal of revision petition should be set aside?
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on its previous decision in the case of Tarsem Chand v. State of Punjab and others, where an identical issue was decided, and directed the appellate authority to re-consider the case of the petitioner accordingly.
Final Decision: The present petition is disposed of in terms of the order dated 28.02.2024 passed by the court in the Tarsem Chand case. The appellate authority is directed to re-consider the case of the petitioner within three months from the date of the order.
JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (Oral)
1. The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is 31.07.2020 (Annexure P he was dismissed from service;
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner the present petition is no more 28.02.2024 in 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP Date of Decision:
12) vide which revision petition filed by the petitioner has been Learned counsel for the petitioner esent petition is no more res integra Tarsem Chand v. State of Punjab and others, CWP No.4591 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-22611-2022 Date of Decision: 27.05.2024 …Petitioner ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Aman Dhir, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of seeking setting aside of inquiry report dated 6); order dated 23.11.2020 (Annexure P-9) whereby order dated 31.03.2021 (Annexure P-10) appeal has been dismissed; and order dated 10.08.2022
12) vide which revision petition filed by the petitioner has been Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that issue involved in integra. This Court vide order dated Tarsem Chand v. State of Punjab and others, CWP No.4591 - The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of inquiry report dated
9) whereby
10) appeal has been dismissed; and order dated 10.08.2022
12) vide which revision petition filed by the petitioner has been submits that issue involved in . This Court vide order dated Tarsem Chand v. State of Punjab and others, CWP No.4591 Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:075000 1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 28-05-2024 00:39:05 :::
2022 -2- - of 2024 has decided an identical issue. He submits that present petition may has decided an identical issue. He submits that present petition may has decided an identical issue. He submits that present petition may has decided an identical issue. He submits that present petition may be disposed of in terms of order dated be disposed of in terms of order dated 28.02.2024 in 28.02.2024 in Tarsem Chand (supra).
3. Mr. Aman Dhir, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab does not Mr. Aman Dhir, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab does not Mr. Aman Dhir, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab does not Mr. Aman Dhir, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab does not oppose prayer of the petitioner and submits that oppose prayer of the petitioner and submits that oppose prayer of the petitioner and submits that appellate authority in terms of appellate authority in terms of afore-cited order would re cited order would re-consider case of the petitioner.
consider case of the petitioner.
4. In the wake of statement of both sides, the present petition In the wake of statement of both sides, the present petition In the wake of statement of both sides, the present petition stands s disposed of in terms of disposed of in terms of order dated 28.02.2024 passed by order dated 28.02.2024 passed by this Court in Tarsem Tarsem Chand (
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
