AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
7 paragraphs · 244 wordsJagmohan Bansal, J
The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking direction to respondent to reinstate him and grant consequential benefits.
The petitioner joined Punjab Police as SPO in December’ 1992. He was implicated in FIR No.53 dated 01.05.2002 under Sections 384, 342 and 511 IPC registered at PS ‘B’ Division, Amritsar and again in FIR No.57 of 2001 under Sections 382, 506 IPC registered at PS Ram Bagh, Amritsar. He was issued show cause notice to which he filed reply. He was discharged from service. He came to be acquitted by trial Court. He made multiple representations requesting respondent to reinstate him.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent reinstated similarly situated employees. Claim of petitioner despite his acquittal was not considered.
The petitioner was working as Special Police Officer (SPO). He was neither governed by Punjab Police Rules nor Punjab Civil Services Rules. He was holding said post on temporary basis. A period of 22 years has passed away. At this stage, it is neither appropriate nor desirable to direct the respondent to reinstate the petitioner. Court is not oblivious of the fact that at present there is no post of SPO with Punjab Police.
In the wake of above discussion and findings, this Court is of the considered opinion that the instant petition deserves to be dismissed and accordingly dismissed
Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of.