82 r 1 1 4 4 Civil Revision Noe6491of2009 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR TllE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARAYANA AT CHANDIGARII Civil Revision Noe6491of200908Ml Date ofDecision2 February28 2011 StateofHaryana and another etitioners Versus Smt RajBala widow ofLate ConstableOin ParkashNo351CPI2 andonother m CORAM2 IIONBLE MR JUSTICE AN JINDAL 0 Presentl Mr SukantGuptaAddl AdvocateGeneral Haryana 0 Mr BS Mokkar Advocate for Mr RajeevKaswan Advocate for Nol and 2 I 14 R 9YR Z AN JINDALJ Assoiled in this petitionis the order dated27052009 passedby 2 CC Civil JudgeouniorDivisionl Karnal the petition I preferred by the Stateof Haryana ond othersand directingthe to 1 pay the arrears of pay and allowancesand further to release the retrial 1t r beneflts familypensionbeneflts to the LRs of the deceased Oln r4 referredto as the 1 The factsof the case are that Om Parkash6sincedeceasedwas recruited as Constable111CommandoPolice Haryanaon 2003 1988 and allotted No2351CPF and thereaAerhc WaS deputed to undergo 1 7 the requisitetraining course so that he could be flnaJlyenrolled as regular constoblein HoiyanaComtnandoPolice Duringthe basic requisite course the plaintif8OmParkash lce failed to cIualifythc said basic courseand was givenfurtherchanceto againappear in 1hecourse However r he failed Ill the subjectGeneral Law but taking a lnient view the board 1 l Batra Amit 2012.12.18 16: 26 True Scannend Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document e 831 Revision Noe6491of2009 2 1 ZP him another chance to clear the Ultimatelyon the test he was to attendthe Police RangerCourse wef 2307990 During this course periodhe misbehavedwith the Incharge of the course and also reinained absent 0om the duly Thus by overall conduct ofthe plaintifsincedeceasedl the Incharge ofthe course him to Police Lines Madhuban on 11 09 1990 ThereaRer the him on 161 11990 under rule 1221 ofthe Punjab PoliceRules The order of was byhim by way of civil 0 suitwhich was contestedbythe On completion of the pleadings 0 the trial Court framedthefollowingissuesl V C5 1 e Whetherthe orderdated 161 11990 is illegalagainstthe I rules of naturaljusticenot binding upon the rightsof the Z plaintiffwithout followingthe procedure under Punjab 2 Police Rule 1624 and Articlc 311629of the I Constitution20RP Z 2 lf issueNo l is provedwhethet4 the plaintiffis entitledto r all the servicebcnefitsalongwith tlle interest 1801020RP 3 Whetherthe plaintiffhas no locus standi to 6le and malntain thepresentsuit70RP 4 Whether the suit is not maintainable lll the present f0rm20RP 5 Whether no valid notice under Section80 CPC was served uponthe defcndant2OPD 6 Whether the suit ofthe plaintiffis pre4natureand liable to be dismissed2OPD 7 Whetherthe suit is timebarrcd20PI0 Batra Amit 2012.12.18 16: 26 True Scannend Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 84 1 Rcvision No6491 of2009 3 1 3 8 Relief Both the issuesbeinginterlinkedandinterconnectedwere dealt with bythe trial Court jointly the Court vide dated 25021997 Annexure P decided issue No l ln favour of the plaintiff whereasissueNo was decidedagainst theplaintiffand observedas underl For the reasons recordedabove impugned order of the plaintifffrom HaryanaPolice Cointnondo under Rule 1221 m r of the PPR 1934 passedby the of Police 0 Commando HaryanaKarnal Is set aside as beingagainstthe Ca rules of naturaljusticeand againstthe containedln 1 1 C5 PPR 1624 and article 31129of the Constitution of Indla In I view ofthe to theplaintiffin case State0f14aryana Z and anotherVs JagdishChander Supral plaintiff is not entitled to be reinstatedin service lt shall be upon the defcndantto hold I enquiryagainsttheplaintiffunder order1624 and Aiticle 311629 1 Cl Z and passfreshorder within six inonthsfromthe dateofreceiptof 094 order of this Court Plaintiff shall not be entitled to salaryand 7 otller monelarybeneflts Hence issueNo l is decidedin favour Z ofthe plaintiffand issueNo is decided against theplaintiff Aggrievedagainstthe said order State had Oled the appeal which was dismissedbytheappellate court videorder dated22042000 The review application flled against the said order was alsodismissedon theplea Parkashhad died on 110719 99 111a road sidcaccident and 6 this factIcould not be brought to the notice of Orstappellate COUrtwhich had dismissedthe appeal on 22042000 The appellatc court had disinissed it on thc groundthat should have the trial court who Batra Amit 2012.12.18 16: 26 True Scannend Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 85 1Revision Noe6491of2009 4 1 4 had issued the directions to hold an enquirywithin six nlonths Petitionere Stateagainfiled regularsecondappealin thisCoutt againstthe said orders dated22042000and 031 12001 which was alsodisinissedon 09052002 However duringenquiryinitiatedbythe State Om Parkashhad died on 11071999 therefore the enquiryremained unconcluded Ultimatelyafter attainedOnalitytheLRs oftlle plaintiffiethe filed execution on 06032002 wherein present 1 C objection petition was tlled bythe Statoetitionerto the effect thatthough the 0 order of dated 161 11990 was set aside yet siilce the Court had 0 d furtherobservedthatthe shall be at Iiberty to hold a fresh enquiry C5 and Om Parkash would not be entitledto be reinstatedand wouldnot be paid I salalyand other benefitsfrom thedateof discharge to the date Z of order Thus in the absenccof grantof any such relief with regardto the 4 L reinstatementthe were not entitledto any beneOts I with regard to thesalaryand other benefits Z 1 The contcstedbythc was holders It was urgedbythe thattheorder dated 161 11990 was 7 set aside and no fresh enquiry was conductedby the againstOm Z Parkash since deceasedlwithin a periodof six months therefore the Om were held Iiable to releaseall the retrlal beileflts arrears of pay pensionand otherallowancesin favourofthe Arguments heard recordperused While deciding 1SSues No l and 2 the Civil Judge Junior 1 Division in dated25021997observedas undei 1 5 For the reasons rccorded above impugnedorder of discharge of the plaintifffromHaryana Police Force undet Rule Batra Amit 2012.12.18 16: 26 True Scannend Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 86 1Revision Noe6491of2009 5 e 1221 of the PunjabPolice Rules 1934 passedby the of Police ComnlandoHaryanaKarnal IS set aside as beingagainstthe rulesof naturaljustice and against the provisions containedin PPR 1624 and Artilce 311 29of the Constitution of India ln view of the relief grantedto the plaintiff111 Case State of Haryana and another V Jogdish Chander Supral plaintiff1S not entitled to be reinstatedin service it shall be upon the defendantto hold enquiryagainst the 0 plaintiffunder Order 1624 and Article 311 21and pass fresh 0 order within six monthsfrom the date of receiptof order of this Court Plaintiff shall not be entitledto salaryand othermonetary I benefits lience issue No is decided111favour of the plaintiff Z and issueNol is decidedagainst theplaintiff C Similarlythe operativepart of tlle decree sheet dated I 202997 observedas underl 0 Z This suit is comingon this 25th dayof Feb 1997 for final disposalbefore me Nazar SinghCivil Judge0D9Karnal In 7 the presenceofSh OP Daryalcounselfor theplaintiffand GP Z for the defendant Ll It is orderedthat in view of my findingson issueNo2 he is not 1 entitled to salatyand other benefitsbetween the 1 date of his discharge and the date of this ordcr No ordersas to costs 93 Thus on penlsalof the j udgmentand decrec sheet under 1 execution the court had not passedthe conditional order Even otherwisein coillpliance with the judgment and decree dated 2502 1997 tlle objections Batra Amit 2012.12.18 16: 26 True Scannend Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 87 Iil Revision Noe6491of2009 6 9 9 vide order dated22092008 had upheldthe order of I am of the view that the Court having not gonebeyondthe dccree couldnot pass any other order with regardto cntitlementof the reinstateinentretrial and beneflts lt could not beexpected froman offlcer ofa normal caliberto go beyondthe decreeand award retrial and benets Even otherwisehadtheplaintiffbeen reinstatedeven then he could not have coinputedthe requisite service entitling him for benefits The 1 enquirycould not be concluded for two reasonsviz flrstlytle case remained 0 pending in appealup to 22042000 the enqlilly alsocould not be 0 concluded on account of deathof Om Parkash The Court appears to havealsofallen in grave error by that are entitlcdto I rctiral and other benefitsafler the deathof Om Parkashwhich has Z resulted into serious of jtistice The Court appears to have C acted againstbasicprinciples of law relating to the execution of I decrees petitionis boundto beacceptedand the 0 Z impugned orderbeingperverseandarbitrary is liableto be sct aside 4 this petitionis occepted order is set aside 7 andthe executionis liable to be dismissed Z Copyof the order be placedbeforethe Honble Administrative JudgeofSessionsDivision Kaithal wherethe ofOcer isposted e31A 5 282011 AN JINDALI vcgarg JUDGE l Cl 91 7 Batra Amit 2012.12.18 16: 26 True Scannend Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document