IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 11.02.2026 Sub-Inspector Ranbir Singh through legal representatives …Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Present: - Mr. Sandeep Dhull, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Ravi Partap Singh, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana (assisted by HC Parveen Kumar, O/o Superintendent of Police, Panipat)

***

JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (Oral)

1. The petitioner through instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is seeking setting aside of order and notice dated 30.09.2016 whereby he has been retired upon attaining the age of 56 years. He is further seeking setting aside of adverse remarks recorded in his Annual Confidential Report (‘ACR’) for the period from 01.04.2014 to 22.11.2014 as well order whereby he was awarded punishment of forfeiture of two increments with permanent effect.

2. The petitioner belonged to Haryana Police Force and was holding rank of Sub-Inspector. In 2014, while he was holding rank of Sub- Inspector, an FIR dated 04.02.2014 under Sections 7/13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and Section 384 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 came to be registered against him at Police Station Chandni Bagh, Panipat. He was suspended on 04.02.2014 and reinstated on 30.09.2015. He was subjected to departmental inquiry wherein was found guilty of alleged charges. The Superintendent of Police, Panipat vide order dated 31.12.2015 awarded him punishment of dismissal from service. He faced trial and came to be acquitted vide judgment dated 10.05.2016 passed by learned Special Judge, Panipat. He filed appeal against the order of dismissal from service before the Appellate Authority which converted the punishment of dismissal to forfeiture of 7 increments with permanent effect. He thereafter preferred revision before the Director General of Police (‘DGP’), Haryana who reduced the punishment to forfeiture of 2 increments with permanent effect. The competent authority recorded his ACR for the period from 22.11.2014 to 31.03.2015. The Reporting Authority assessed him dishonest and unreliable officer. The remarks of the Reporting Officer were communicated to him on 26.10.2015. He preferred representation against adverse remarks before Higher Authority. His representation came to be dismissed vide communication dated 16.08.2016. The representation was dismissed after considering comments of the Reporting Authority. He attained age of 55 years on 19.04.2015. The respondent in exercise of power conferred by Rule 9.18(1)(c) of Punjab Police Rules, 1934, as applicable to State of Haryana (for short ‘PPR’), ordered to retire him w.e.f. 31.12.2016.

3. On 07.12.2016, this Court while issuing notice of motion passed the following order:

“The prayer is for quashing of the adverse remarks regarding integrity in the ACR for the period 01.04.2014 till 20.11.2014 conveyed vide Memo dated 26.10.2015 (P-1) as also the order dated 16.08.2016 P-5 whereby representation against P-1 has been rejected without application of mind; further challenge is to the punishment order dated 14.09.2016 (P-11) whereby the Revisional Authority has reduced/awarded punishment of stoppage of two increments with cumulative effect while reversing the dismissal order passed by the Disciplinary Authority; lastly challenge is to the order dated 30.09.2016 (P-13) whereby the petitioner has been prematurely retired made effective w.e.f. 31.12.2016.

It is submitted that petitioner was promoted as Sub Inspector in December 2013 on the criteria of selection. For the alleged instance of accepting bribe of Rs.40,000/- on 08.12.2013 an FIR was lodged on 04.02.2014 and also departmental proceedings initiated. In the criminal proceedings, the petitioner stands acquitted vide judgment dated 10.05.2016 (Annexure P-3), which has attained finality. The Departmental proceedings culminated into passing of order dated 31.12.2015 (P-7), dismissal from service which