Case BriefsHigh Courts

Patna High Court: The Bench of Madhuresh Prasad, J. allowed a civil writ petition filed by a constable who was dismissed from his service without pointing out infirmity in his appointment and also without affording him a hearing in the matter.

Petitioner herein was dismissed from his service as a constable in the Bihar Police, pursuant to scrutiny by the Director General of Police and Inspector General of various appointments made earlier. It was found that the appointment of the petitioner along with others was illegally made in an irregular manner. The instant petition was filed assailing the said order of dismissal.

Respondent’s objection was that the petition, having been filed ten years after petitioner’s dismissal, was barred by delay and laches. Counsel for the petitioner Mr Radha Mohan Pandey submitted that the order of dismissal was without any show cause or opportunity and without holding a regular enquiry or departmental proceeding against the petitioner, even though he had worked in the police force as a confirmed employee on the post of constable for about 12 years.

The Court opined that petitioner’s dismissal was done at the dictate of a higher authority on the basis of a perception that in the period when he was appointed under the special circumstances, all constables were appointed irregularly. This order did not show as to what was the infirmity in his appointment. Also, the said order was passed without affording any opportunity of hearing to him. As such, the dismissal order was unsustainable in law.

With regards to the objection of delay, the Court noted that petitioner had filed an appeal against dismissal order in the year 2014, and pursuant to dismissal thereof the present petition was filed in the year 2016.

In view of the above, the order dismissing petitioner from service was quashed and he was directed to be reinstated.[Shambhu Nath Tiwary v. State of Bihar,  2019 SCC OnLine Pat 394, Order dated 13-03-2019]

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Rajasthan High Court: The Bench of Alok Sharma, J. dismissed the current petition since grievance agitated in the petition was not set forth by the petitioner at the relevant time.

The facts of the case are the petitioner having passed the written examination for appointment to the post of Constable under the Rajasthan Police Subordinate Service Rules, 1989 was called for the Physical Standard Test (PST) and thereafter required to participate in the Physical Efficiency Test (PET). The running track was muddied for reason of heavy rains which resulted in obstructing the petitioner’s performance up-to his potential and his resultant failure thus he sought another opportunity.

The Court dismissed the petition relying on Revant Ram Meghwal v. State of Rajasthan, SBCWP No. 13731 of 2018 stated that there was nothing on record to show that any grievance as agitated in this petition was set forth by the petitioner at a relevant time. Further, there was nothing on record to establish that the running conditions of the track at Jaipur when the petitioner’s PET was held, was not suitable for the test being held. [Peetambar v. State of Rajasthan, 2019 SCC OnLine Raj 140, Order dated 14-02-2019]

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Rajasthan High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Arun Bhansali, J. dismissed a plea against the grant of inadequate time to appear for the PET examination.

This writ petition was sought by the petitioner to direct the respondents to conduct fresh Physical Efficiency Test (PET) as he was not granted sufficient time to prepare for the same result of which he failed.

Referring to the facts, after passing the written examination for the post of Constable, the petitioner downloaded his admission card one day before the PET wherein he was to run for 5 km in 25 min and being well aware of such requirements he opted to fill the form, therefore the claim for lack of time was baseless as he had sufficient time and opportunity to participate in the said test.

Accordingly being devoid of merits, the writ petition was dismissed. [Tejpal Singh v. State of Rajasthan,2018 SCC OnLine Raj 2178, decided on 29-11-2018]