In that view of the matter, the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition.
1034 A learned Single Judge of the High Court took the view that as the Home Secretary was specifically empowered by the State Government as the reporting authority under Rule 2 e of the Rules, he had the authority to write the report or to make adverse remarks against the performances of the Inspector General of Police, Haryana.
From the Judgment and Order dated 10.8.1984 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in L.P.A. No.
Hence this appeal by special leave by the State of Haryana.
Respondent in person.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
K. Garg, and A. Saran for the Intervener.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by DUTT, J. This appeal by special leave has been preferred by the State of Haryana against the judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court of Punjab Haryana whereby the Division Bench has set aside the judgment of a learned Single Judge of the High Court dismissing the writ petition of the respondent Shri P.C. Wadhwa, a member of the Indian Police Service.
The re spondent did number make any representation against the adverse remarks to the reviewing authority under the Rules.
Instead, he chose to file a writ petition before the Punjab Haryana High Court challenging the authority of the Home Secretary to write a companyfidential report assessing the performances, character, companyduct and qualities of the respondent as the Inspector General of Police and prayed for the quashing of such report or adverse remarks.
S. Nariman, S.S. Shroff and Mrs. P.S. Shroff for the Appellant.
The adverse remarks were duly accepted by the companypetent authority under the All India Services Confidential Rolls Rules, 1970, hereinafter referred to as the Rules.
4395 of 1986.
Being aggrieved by the judgment of the learned Single Judge, the respondent filed an appeal against the same to the Division Bench of the High Court and, as stated al ready, the Division Bench set aside the judg ment of the learned Single Judge and allowed the writ petition holding inter alia, that the Home Secretary had numberauthority to submit any report against the performance of the respond ent for the aforesaid period during which he was the Inspector General of Police, Haryana.
After such acceptance, the adverse remarks were companymunicated to Shri Wadhwa by the Home Secre tary by his letter dated May 4, 1982, about two years three months after the close of the relevant period of March 31, 1980.
It appears that certain adverse remarks were made by the Home Secretary to the Govern ment of Haryana against Shri Wadhwa, the Inspector General of Police for the said period.
748 of 1983.
who was the Inspector General of Police, Haryana, from June 30, 1979 to July 25, 1980.
