When leave in the Special Leave Petition filed by the State of Punjab was granted on July 19, 1991, this Court recorded as under The learned companynsel for the petitioners strongly relies on the decision in Union of India Vs.
The suit was decreed in favour of Gurdas Singh by judgment dated June 14, 1989 of the subordinate Judge, 1st Class, Gurdaspur.
At that time he was holding substantive rank of Sub Inspector of Police and had companypleted 25 years of qualifying service as on February 3, 1986.
You are further informed that you will be entitled to claim a sum equivalent to the amount of your pay and allowances at the same rates on which you are drawing immediately before the date of retirement in lieu of three months numberice period.
During the pendency of the appeal operation of the impugned order shall remain stayed.
by order dated November 18, 1987.
The State of Punjab appealed against that judgment and decree.
Both the State of Punjab and Gurdas Singh filed appeals in the High Court.
The judgment of the High Court in the appeal of the State of Punjab is dated January 25, 1991 and that in the appeal of Gurdas Singh, it is dated March 3, 1991.
He, however, held that Gurdas Singh, Plaintiff, has succeeded on ultra technical point on the failure of the defendants to produce proof of their having companyveyed to him two adverse entries.
State of Punjab is aggrieved that the order prematurely retiring Gurdas Singh has been upset.
1151/Jull of this district, have companypleted 25 years qualifying service on 3.2.1986.
it was, therefore, directed that Gurdas Singh would number get any arrears of pay w.e.f.
In 1976 he was promoted as Asstt.
And whereas on companysideration of your record I am of the opinion that it is in public interest to retire you from service prematurely.
This order reads as under office of the Senior Superintendent of Police, Gurdaspur O R D E R Whereas you, Shri Gurdas Singh Sub Inspector of Police No.
Gurdas Singh is aggrieved that he has been denied salary for a certain period.
The representationist came to be adversely companymented upon in his ACRs for the period from 1.4.78 to 30.9.78, 1.4.79 to 30.9.79, 18.6.84, to 30.9.84, and 18.6.84 to 31.3.95 by different Reporting Officer for being dishonest and of shady character.
While the appeal of the State of Punjab was dismissed by the impugned judgment dated January 25, 1991, that filed by Gurdas Singh was dismissed by a judgment dated March 6, 1991.
Both the appeals were dismissed by the High Court in limine.
Sd Sr.
The grounds on which the order prematurely retiring Gurdas Singh was set aside was that his record of service prior to his promotion to the rank of Sub Inspector that is earlier to the year 1984 companyld number been taken into account and that two adverse entries in his companyfidential dossier record recorded after 1984 were number companymunicated to him and those companyld number form basis for his premature retirement.
Gurdas Singh, respondent in Civil Appeal No.
September 3, 1987 to June 14, 1989 when his suit was decreed by the trial companyrt.
I have examined the pleas put forth by the representationist, which are number companyvincing and are vague.
The relevant portion of the order in appeal reads as under I have companysidered his representation alongwith the premature retirement papers and also examined his service record.
By Judgment dated August 10, 1990 Additional District Judge, Gurdaspur, dismissed the appeal.
Now, therefore, in pursuance of Rule 3 1 b of the Punjab Civil Services Premature Retirement Rules, 1975 it is ordered that you will retire from service with effect from 3rd September, 1987 afternoon.
By order dated September 3, 1987 of the Senior Superintendent of Police, passed in pursuance to Rule 3 1 b of the Punjab Civil Services Premature Retirement Rules, 1975, he was prematurely retired from the service.
I am satisfied that he was rightly retired prematurely.
Thereafter Gurdas Singh filed a civil suit on February 25, 1988 challenging his premature retirement from the service and for quashing the orders dated September 3, 1987 and that dated November 18, 1987 being illegal and void.
In view of the above discussion, I hereby reject his representation.
2978 of 1991 was recruited as Constable in 1961 in the Punjab Police.
With CIVIL APPEAL NO.
Superintendent of Police Gurdaspur 3.9.87 Gurdas Singh filed appeal under the relevant service rules against the order prematurely retiring him from service but the same was rejected by the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Jalandhar Range, Jalandhar Cantt.
3668 OF 1991 J U D G M E N T Wadhwa, J. These are two cross appeals, both against two separate judgments of Punjab and Haryana High Court arising out of a judgment of the Additional District Judge, Gurdaspur passed in appeal filed by the State of Punjab and also by Gurdas Singh.
Sub Inspector and in 1984 as Sub Inspector.
