“For a person in uniformed service, adverse entry relating to his/her integrity and conduct is to be adjudged by the superior authority”: Supreme Court
On June 14, 2023, the vacation bench of the Supreme Court expressed displeasure over the failure to amend and update the Punjab Civil Services Rules, 1934, with the correct official description of posts to obviate confusion. The bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Ahsanuddin Amanullah directed the states of Punjab and Haryana to take appropriate measures for the same. The appellant moved to the Supreme Court being aggrieved by the final order and judgment delivered by a learned Division Bench of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana on April 25, 2023. The original rules framed in 1934 contemplated the authorities as “The Inspector-General, a Deputy Inspector-General, and a Superintendent of Police.”
The top Court stated that “The Inspector_General of that time (when the service was called Imperial/Indian Police) headed the State Police, but is today known as, in most States and Union Territories, barring a handful, in the hierarchy of the State Police, as the Director-General of Police, as officer drawn from the Indian Police Service, who sits at the apex of the state police machinery.” The bench also mentioned that for a person in uniformed service, adverse entry relating to his/her integrity and conduct is to be adjudged by the superior authority(ies) who record and approve such entry.
While hearing the matter, it was observed that “The Rules were also framed at a time when the system of Ranges and Commissionerates had not been established. Indubitably, the Rules, for better or for worse (worse, we hazard) have not kept pace with the times. We do not appreciate why the authorities concerned are unable to update/amend the Rules with at least the correct official description of posts to obviate confusion.” In this case, one Assistant Sub-Inspector made a complaint against the appellant (Constable in State Police who was further promoted as Head Constable). This led to a departmental inquiry, where the appellant was held guilty and ordered to be reverted from Head Constable to Constable. In context with this, a representation was filed by the appellant whereas a second consolidated representation was accepted.
Thereafter, the appellant received a Show-Cause Notice from the Director General of Police, stating that undue benefit had been given to the appellant by expunction of remarks and why the same should not be restored and an order of compulsory retirement be passed against him. The appellant filed his Reply to the Show-Cause Notice. The Director General of Police, Haryana by order directed the reconstruction of the Annual Confidential Report. The appellant filed Civil Writ Petition before the High Court. During the pendency of this writ petition, the appellant received notice for retirement issued by the Superintendent of Police who informed him that his service was not required by the department beyond the age of 55 years, in the public interest and he was to stand retired from service. The learned Single Judge concluded, in essence, that the original expunction could not be held to be illegal, and the subsequent reconstruction of the remarks would be incorrect in view of the pronouncements of law referred to by him.
After hearing the matter, the bench ordered that the Director-General of Police rightly show-caused the appellant and to take certain steps. The Supreme Court ordered that “Considering the chain of events, the consequential action, in our considered view, cannot be said to be arbitrary or shocking the conscience of the Court, so as to warrant interference.” It further added, “For a person in uniformed service, like the police, adverse entry relating to his/her integrity and conduct is to be adjudged by the superior authority who record and approve such entry. Personnel having such remarks being compulsorily retired as per the statutory provisions under the Punjab Civil Services Rules, 1934, in the instant facts, is not an action this court would like to indirect.”
