Civil Writ Petition No.20291 of 2008 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. HC Om Parkash PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Haryana and others RESPONDENTS. CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MEHTAB S.GILL HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.KANNAN Present:- Shri R.N.Lohan, Advocate for the petitioner. MEHTAB S.GILL, J. Petitioner has prayed for the issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the adverse remarks dated 28.5.2008 (Annexure P-1). Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that petitioner is serving the Police Department since 4.10.1989. He was promoted as Head Constable on 17.10.2006. His work and conduct has been Good/Very Good. There has been no complaint against him. All the ACRs of the petitioner have been Good/Very Good category. The only adverse ACR against the petitioner Civil Writ Petition No.20291 of 2008 -2- is from 3.8.2007 to 31.3.2008. He has held several important posts. Never was the integrity of the petitioner doubted. Petitioner had filed a representation before respondent No.3 against the adverse remarks. But the representation of the petitioner was rejected on 3.9.2008 stating that the Inspector General of Police Hissar Range, Hissar, had carried out a surprise checking of Police Station Garhi, District Jind and found during inspection that petitioner had accepted bribe. This could not have been done so. The ACR of the petitioner could not have been recorded by respondent on the basis of the letter dated 18.9.2007 of the Inspector General of Police, Hissar Range, Hissar. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the writ petition and the annexures attached thereto. The main thrust of argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that petitioner had a very good service record and respondent No.4 could not have given an integrity doubtful report to the petitioner, merely on the basis of the letter of the Inspector General of Police, Hissar Range, Hissar. Vide the impugned order dated 28.5.2008 (Annexure P-1), the Superintendent of Police, Jind, had found the integrity of the petitioner doubtful. His moral character has not been good. In the general remarks column, it has been noted that he accepted bribe money from one Satish Kumar. One Satish Kumar had complained against the petitioner that he had paid Rs.200/- to the petitioner to have a compromise effected. The complaint was of a general nature and it is thereafter the Inspector General of Police, Hissar Range, Hissar, took an adverse view against the petitioner. It is on the basis of the surprise checking done by the Inspector General of Police, Hissar Range, Hissar, that respondent Civil Writ Petition No.20291 of 2008 -3- No.4 i.e. the Superintendent of Police, Jind gave adverse remarks against the petitioner. We do not find any infirmity in the impugned order regarding the adverse remarks given to the petitioner. Petition is devoid of merit and is dismissed. ( MEHTAB S.GILL ) JUDGE ( K.KANNAN ) December 9, 2008 JUDGE GD WHETHER TO BE REFERRED TO REPORTER? YES/NO