Anil Kumar Singh vs State of Punjab and Others

Surya Kant, J.—The petitioner was working as an Ahlmad in the Sessions Court at Bathinda. A criminal case vide FIR No. 21 dated 01.02.1996, under Sections 467/465/468/471/120-B IPC, Police Station, Kotwali Bathinda, was registered against him. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bathinda, vide order dated 27.04.1998 found the petitioner guilty of some of the offence[s] and convicted him. Keeping the conduct of the petitioner which led to his conviction in the criminal case in view, he was dismissed from service by the District & Sessions Judge, Bathinda vide a self-speaking order 07.05.1998 [Annexure P-4].

Aggrieved, the petitioner filed the departmental appeal which was heard and dismissed by an Hon''ble Judge of this Court on administrative side vide order dated 15.09.2000, inter-alia, observing that "a forger is not acceptable to this department. The signal is clear and loud. Anybody who tries to forge the administrative documents or judicial documents has no place in this department of faith and justice.

The aggrieved petitioner has approached this Court.

Suffice it to mention that once the petitioner has been found guilty of an offence involving moral turpitude, no fault can be found with the impugned order and invocation of powers under the second proviso to Article 311[2], calls for no interference by this Court. However, as and when the petitioner earns acquittal in the criminal case, he shall be at liberty to impugn the order of dismissal from service afresh, in accordance with law.

Dismissed in limine.