IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 15874 OF 2006 DATE OF DECISION: February 22, 2008 Parties Name Jaswant Singh ..PETITIONER VERSUS State of Haryana etc. ...RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH HON'BLE MR JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH PRESENT: Mr. S.N. Gaur, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. M.S. Sindhu, D.A.G., Haryana, for the respondents. JASBIR SINGH, J. (oral) Order. Vide order dated September 16, 2006 (Annexure P-7), the petitioner was discharged from service by invoking the provisions of Rule 12.21 of the Punjab Police Rules, 1934( in short the Rules). It is apparent from the records that the petitioner was taken in service, in the police department of State of Haryana, as a Constable on August 15, 2004. He was sent to undergo necessary training course but he failed to pass the same. In view of that a show cause notice was issued to him to discharge him from service. Relevant contents of the notice read thus: “That you could not be successful even after recruit training for one year, six months and 23 days. This shows that you did not take interest in your training/duty. It is clear from this that you CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 15874 OF 2006 -2- can not prove to be a good police official. Therefore, I have come to the temporary conclusion that why you should not be discharged under Rule 12.21 Part -2 of Punjab Police Rules, from the service because you are unfit for becoming a good police officer in the disciplined Police Department. In this regard if you have anything to say in your defence, you may file your written reply in this office within fifteen days of receipt of this notice. In case no reply is received within the stipulated period, it shall be presumed that you have nothing to say in this regard and the proposed order of punishment shall be passed against you.” His reply was received, which was found to be unsatisfactory and thereafter order under challenge was passed. In this writ petition, it is contention of counsel for the petitioner that as per Instructions Mannual (P8), if a constable fails to pass the requisite course in the first attempt, he is supposed to be given more chances to pass the same. Reference has been made to Instruction 5.10, of the Mannualwhich reads thus: “Chances for re-admission (i)If a trainee fails in the final examination in any subject, he shall be given two more chance to clear the examination. A trainee, who fails to get the pass marks in a subject even in the third attempt, shall be deemed to have failed to qualify the training course. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 15874 OF 2006 -3- (ii)A Constable recruit who fails to qualify the basic course is unlikely to prove an efficient police officer and he may be discharged under Punjab Police Rules 12.21. (iii)No trainee who has failed to qualify in a promotion course at the Haryana Police Academy, shall be readmitted in that promotion course in future. (iv) No directly appointed police officer who fails to qualify the basic training course, shall be readmitted to the same course or examination in future.” It was specifically mentioned in this writ petition that except failing in the requisite test, there was nothing against the petitioner, on the basis of which it can be said that he was not likely to become an efficient police officer. By taking note of above said averment on October 11, 2007, following order was passed by this Court: “Learned State counsel is directed to put on record an affidavit of a responsible officer, stating the facts which were taken note of, to say that the petitioner is not likely to become an efficient police officer.” In response thereto, affidavit has been filed, wherein it has been stated that besides failing in the requisite examination, the petitioner has to his credit five punishments as he remained absent during the training course. Detail in that regard has been given in the affidavit, which is available at page 34 of this writ petition. Merely because mention of those punishments has not been made in the show cause notice, is no ground to CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 15874 OF 2006 -4- grant relief to the petitioner. It is not disputed before us that, in fact the petitioner had gone absent five times and punishment(s) was accordingly awarded to him. Taking note of totality of the circumstances, we are of the view that the competent authority has rightly arrived at the conclusion that the petitioner was not likely to become an efficient police officer. The petitioner, went absent for five times, during training course, can not be expected to become efficient police officer in future. Dismissed. ( Jasbir Singh ) Judge ( Jaswant Singh) February 22, 2008. Judge DKC