IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP(T) No.: 2272 of 2008. Decided on: 04.03.2009. Shri Diwan Chand. … … Petitioner. Versus The Director General of Police and Another. … … Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the petitioner: Mr. J.R. Thakur, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. R. K. Sharma, Senior Additional Advocate General with Mr. Rajinder Dogra, Additional Advocate General and Mr. Vikas Rathore, Deputy Advocate General. Rajiv Sharma, Judge (Oral): The disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the petitioner on 30th January, 1993. The precise charge levelled against the petitioner was that he was posted at bus stand liquor vend on 26th January, 1993 to keep secret watch as this day was declared as dry day by the Government. He under the influence of liquor obstructed the two other guards from discharging their duties and attempted to rescue two accused Lakhbir Singh and Devi Ram from arrest on the bus stand. He Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. - 2 - was medically examined and according to medical opinion, it was found that he had consumed liquor. Inquiry was conducted by Shri Gita Ram, Deputy Superintendent of Police. He was served with a show cause notice why two increments for three years be not stopped. He filed reply to the same. The Superintendent of Police, district Shimla vide order dated 3rd June, 1993 after considering the reply filed by the petitioner imposed the penalty of stoppage of future increments for two years permanently. The petitioner was also not held entitled to any payment for the period of suspension from 29th January, 1993 to 3rd March, 1993. He preferred an appeal before the Appellate Authority. The appellate authority had concurred with the findings of the disciplinary authority vide order dated 31st December, 1993. It has been proved tangibly against the petitioner that he had consumed liquor while on duty at bus stand on 26th January, 1993. This was certified by the Medical Officer vide medical certificate No.67/93. The complaint was lodged by Head Constable Varinder Kumar in Roznamcha vide report dated 26th January, 1993. It is apparent from the record that the inquiry had been held against the petitioner according to law. He was afforded reasonable opportunity to defend himself. The Superintendent of Police had issued show cause notice to him why three increments be not stopped. He filed reply to the same. The Superintendent of Police has taken the same into consideration before imposing the impugned penalty. The order passed by the Appellate Authority is a speaking order. However, the - 3 - petitioner could not be denied the salary for the period with effect from 29th January, 1993 to 3rd March, 1993. Accordingly, in view of the observations made hereinabove, the writ petition is disposed of. The respondents are directed to release the salary of petitioner for the period from 29th January, 1993 to 3rd March, 1993. However, there shall be no order as to costs. March 04, 2009. (Rajiv Sharma) (sck). Judge.