WGH COURT 9F CHHATTESG&RH AT BILA$PUR NWSEON BENCH CQR: AM HON’BLE SHR! H. L. QATTIJ, QJ. & HON’ELE SHRI DREESHMUKH, J. WRET PE?IT}ON N0, 5?87 OF 2§GB ?ET!T!ONERS : 1. 03 §E$§30NQ§NT$ State of Madhva Pradesh ihrough Secretary, Department of Home Affairs, Bhopal. D.!.G. of Poiice; Raipur Dn‘ Raipur‘ Superimendent of PoHce, Durg. -Ve!’$US~ Smt. Luawati DevL W/o Late Saiva Prakash Sahi. Ranjit Sahi. Goutam Sam, Visha5 Sahi. Vivek Sahi.‘ Madhu Sahil Shivaii Sahi. Badal Sai. h Ku‘ Amita Sahi. Neeraj Sahi. (All applicants are iegai representatives of deceased applicant Sathya Prakaeh Sahl, QrNot‘lS/B, ‘ Avenue-Q Sector—l, Bhllai) HresEmIi Shri Sanjav St Agrawai G A for the petitioners/State. Shri M. Kt Baeg, Counsel forthe respondents, DRAL ORDER (Passed on 04.042007) The following oral order of he Court wee passed by H.L.Da‘mi, C.J. t This, Writ Petition was filed under Articie-225/227 of the Ccnstitution of India questioning the legality or Oman/vise of the oro‘er ‘l passed by éhe Madhva Pi‘adesh State Administrative Tribunal (‘ihe Tribunal for shorf) in QANOASSH 989 dated 07—03—2000. 2. By the impugne order the Tribunal has granted cerlaén reliefs to g , the deceased employee and his family members. 3. Late Satya Prkash was appointed as a Police Constabie on a probation for a period of 2 years by the respondents in the month of May 1984. While working as probationer, he was served with the carge h memo dated 23—05-1985 inter aiiaalging certain acts of omissions and le commissions said to have been committed by him. After receipt of the charge memo, he filed his reply on 27-05~1Q85. The Superintendent of Police who was the disciplina authoriy, without appointing any enqry ry t ui officer to enquire into the allegations evelled in the charge memo, had / proceeed to pass an order exrcising his powers under Regulation-59 of d e the Madhya Pradesh Police Regulations in short “the Reguiations”). ( Aggrieved by the said order passed by the Superintennt of Police, de tya akash, when he was alive, had ed O No.456l’i Q89 before the Sa Pr m A Tribunal. 4. During pendency of the application, Satya Prakash expired: With the permission of the Tribunal, his legal representatives have come on record and prosecuted the Originai Application filed by late Satya Prakashr The Tribunal after detailed consideration of the facts pleaded ’ by the parties to the [is and after referring to Regulation-59 of the Regulations has come to the conclusion that the order passed by the Superintendent of Police discharging the services of a probationer, is contrary to the aforesaid Regulation and accordingly directed the FF; l respondents in the appHcation to grant certain monetauy benefé‘ts to the Xegal representatives of [ate Satya Prakash and also directed the respondents to consider if it is possibie and permissible to offer an appointment on compassionate ground. it is the correctness or otherwise of the order which is the subiect matter of this Writ Petition w ,_ Tribunal was not justified in coming to the conclusion that once an enquiry was initiated by issuing the charge memo; the respondents could not have invoked the provisions of Regulation-59 of the Regulations and, therefore, the impugned order passed by the Tribunal is contrary to Regotation-59 of the Regulations and also contrary to the weii estabtis‘ned iegai principles. o, Learned counsel appearing for the State wouid contend that tne 8. Per contra, learned counsei appearing tot the respondents in the Writ Petition iustities the impugned order passed by the Tribunai‘ 7r The admitted facts are’that late Satya Prakash was appointed as Poiice Constable on probation tn the month of May 1984. He was assigned certain duties by the authorities. Being of the opinion that he failed to discharge the functions assigned to him, they had initiated proceedings by issuing a charge memo. After receipt of the charge memo, the delinquent empioyee had fiied reply, The Disciplinary Authority, without concluding the proceedings so initiated: had thought it fit to take an easy course to dispense with the services ot iate Satya Prakash. For'that purpose, the Disciplinary Authority had invoked» Regulation-59 of the Reguiations. The Tribunai in its order has made reference to the impugned order passed by the Superintendent of Police. The petitioners/State while nling this Writ Petition, for the reasons best known to them, have not even produced the order passed by the m Superintendent of Police in exercise of his powers under Regulatien—5 cf the egulations. Therefore, we have to go by whatever the Tribune-i has said ih its order. . The Triburiai whiie allowing the appiication fiied by ih apiicaht hs stated as under: ”in fact the order of discharge has been issued under Reguiation 59 which pertains to ihe period of prcbaiioh of a recruit and which prescribes a period of two yeas fer new recruite and provides that the service of a recruit may be dispensed with durihg h prationary period f in the opinion of the Superintendent he is uniikeiy to become a satisfactory tioeOfficer. i he present case, however, the deceased appiicahte‘ discharge was quite oieariy for a speome taut for which he had been issued a charge sheet Therefr, even though th order of dische does not mention the specific fault and only innocuoueiy mentions that services are not required the dischge of the deceased applica during the period of probation has to e heid to be remove! or dismissal within the meaning of Poiice Reguiation 240.” Po n t 9. Even otheswise aso, Reguiation 59 of the Regulations ahorizes the emptoyee to dischrge the services of the probationer under certain circumstances. The guiation is in t parts; the irst li ct e Regulation states that every recruitee wiii be oh probation or a period of two years which may be in two periods of 6 months eaohpif e Superinendent of Poie consider it desirabte and the econd portion of I the Reguiation authorizes the Superintendent of Poiice to dispeneeiwith the services of prationer it e is of the opinion that the reoruitee is unikeiy to become a satisfactory Police Officer. That oniy means that after subjective and objective satisfaction, the Superintendent of Poiice has to make up his mind and form an opinion about the capacity and capabiiity of a recruitee whether he can become a satisfactory Police Officer if he is of the opinion that the recruittee may not become a 9 R 8 e p a g r te ob i i oe e arg ar nt b i ut a Re wo f mo th f th t io s s ob h i satisfactory PoHce Officer then he can certainly discharge or dispense with the services 0f the reoruittee during the proba’iionary period. 10, in ihe instant case, the Tribunai in its order had observed that nowhere in the order passed by the Superintendent of Poiice he has stated that the recruittee concerned ie unlikely to become a satisfactory Police Officer. Regulations that are framed are statutory Regulations and they are required to be followed by the authorities. The Regulation categorically states that it is only after an opinion is formed by the Superintendent of Potice that the recruittee is unlikely to become a satisfactory police officer, the provisions of Regulation 59 could be invoked by him to dispense with the services of a recruittee. 12. in view of the (above, we are of the opinion that the Tribunal correctly understanding the purport of Regulation~59 of the Regulations has granted certain reliefs to the legal representatives of iate Satya Prakash. in our opinion, the findings recorded by the Tribunai cannot be characterized either as arbitrary, capricious, illegal or contrary to the statutory Regulation and also contrary to the well estabiisheci legaily principles. 13. in that view of the matter: interference of the impugned order passed by the Tribunal is not called for, Accordingly, the petition requires W f , (A t as a to be rejected and it is rejected. Ordered accordingly. _ L “ . wt m \x , i . . " Sal— i\ o g 7 5d]- chief Justice