IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP(T) No.: 2374 of 2008, Decided on: 07.04.2009. Kashmir Singh. … … … Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. and others. … … … Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. Whether approved for reporting?No.1 For the petitioner: Mr. Ajay Sharma, 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 petitioner was promoted purely on temporary basis against short terms/ex-cadre posts as Deputy Superintendent of Police, vide Notification dated 13.5.1994. He was promoted on regular basis on 7.11.1994. He was reverted to the sustantative post of Inspector on 30.11.1994. He assailed this order before the learned Himachal Administrative Tribunal. The learned Tribunal stayed the reversion of the petitioner on 7.12.1994. Thereafter, on the basis of the interim order passed by the learned Tribunal, the order dated 30.11.1994 was Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?No. - 2 - withdrawn on 26.12.1994. He was permitted to hold the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police till further orders. The learned Senior Additional Advocate General was directed on 25.2.2009 to seek instructions about the exact status of the petitioner. He informed the Court on the basis of written instructions dated 21.3.2009 that the petitioner has superannuated on 31.8.2000 as Deputy Superintendent of Police. Mr.Ajay Sharma, Advocate has strenuously argued that neither any notice was issued nor any departmental proceedings were initiated against the petitioner before the issuance of order dated 30.11.1994. He contended that the order dated 30.11.1994 on the face of it was penal/punitive. This submission is not refuted by the learned Senior Additional Advocate General. The foundation for the issuance of order dated 30.11.1994 is the incident dated 16.11.1994. He was directed by the Superintendent of Police, Bilaspur on 16.11.1994 at 7 P.M. to escort 30 trucks from Bilaspur to Hamirpur border. He showed his unwillingness to escort the trucks initially. However, he escorted the trucks half heartedly. It is on the basis of this misconduct that the petitioner has been reverted. The reversion of the petitioner is on the basis of misconduct. In these circumstances, it was necessary to hold a regular inquiry before reverting the petitioner. The reversion of the petitioner amounts to punishment and the same could not be done without complying with the principles of natural justice and the Rules relating to departmental proceedings. The reversion in the present case also casts stigma upon the petitioner. - 3 - Consequently, the writ petition is allowed, the order dated 30.11.1994 (Annexure R-2) is quashed and set aside. The petitioner had continuously worked as Deputy Superintendent of Police on the basis of interim orders passed by the learned Tribunal and superannuated on 31.8.2000. Accordingly, he is entitled to all the consequential benefits. No Costs. April 7, 2009. (Rajiv Sharma) (rkv). Judge. - 4 -