In a significant ruling, the Rajasthan High Court has granted relief to Shri Sunder Pal, a constable dismissed from service 28 years ago over allegations of forging documents related to his age at the time of his appointment. The court has directed the government to extend all consequential and retiral benefits to the petitioner.
Background of the Case
Shri Sunder Pal, son of Shri Thakuri @ Gyarsi Ram, was appointed as a Constable (Band) in the Rajasthan Armed Constabulary (RAC) on December 23, 1981. His appointment was based on a transfer certificate from the Government Upper Primary School, Japawali, Badi Dholpur, which stated his date of birth as January 15, 1958. However, it was later alleged that his actual date of birth was January 15, 1950, making him ineligible for the position due to age restrictions.
On April 2, 1996, a charge sheet was issued against Sunder Pal, accusing him of altering his date of birth to secure the job. Following an inquiry, he was dismissed from service on October 17, 1996. His appeal against the dismissal was rejected by the Deputy Inspector General of Police, RAC Range, Jaipur, on March 31, 1997.
Legal Issues Involved
The primary legal issues in this case revolved around:
– The validity of the disciplinary proceedings and the evidence used to support the allegations of document forgery.
– The implications of Sunder Pal’s acquittal in a related criminal case on the disciplinary action taken against him.
– The procedural fairness of the inquiry conducted by the disciplinary authorities.
Court’s Decision
The case, titled Shri Sunder Pal v. State of Rajasthan & Ors., was heard by Justice Ganesh Ram Meena. The petitioner was represented by Ms. Sarita Chaudhary, while the respondents were represented by Mr. Pradeep Kalwania, Government Counsel, with Mr. Shivam Chauhan and Mr. Vijay Shankar, Assistant Commandant, RAC, Dholpur.
In its judgment, the court noted several procedural lapses and inadequacies in the disciplinary proceedings. Key observations included:
– The disciplinary authority failed to provide a detailed discussion on the evidence proving the allegations of forgery.
– The appellate authority’s reasoning that Sunder Pal could not have been below 25 years of age at the time of his appointment because he was married with three children was deemed unacceptable. The court highlighted that child marriages were prevalent in rural areas during the 1970s and 1980s, making it plausible for a person to be married with children before reaching 25 years of age.
– The court emphasized that the burden of proof in service jurisprudence lies with the respondents, who failed to provide cogent and valid evidence to substantiate the charges against the petitioner.
The court concluded that the orders of dismissal and the subsequent rejection of the appeal were non-speaking, illegal, and arbitrary. Consequently, the court quashed the dismissal order dated October 17, 1996, and the appellate order dated March 31, 1997.
Relief Granted
The Rajasthan High Court directed the government to treat Sunder Pal as if no dismissal order was ever passed, thereby entitling him to all consequential and retiral benefits. The court instructed the authorities to extend these benefits within four months from the date of submitting the certified copy of the order.
This ruling marks a significant victory for Sunder Pal, who has fought a prolonged legal battle to clear his name and secure his rightful benefits. The judgment underscores the importance of procedural fairness and the need for robust evidence in disciplinary proceedings.
Also Read
Case Details:
– Case Number: S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 814/2001
– Petitioner: Shri Sunder Pal
– Respondents: State of Rajasthan & Ors.
– Becnh: Justice Ganesh Ram Meena
– Petitioner’s Counsel: Ms. Sarita Chaudhary
– Respondents’ Counsel: Mr. Pradeep Kalwania GC with Mr. Shivam Chauhan and Mr. Vijay Shankar, Assistant Commandant, RAC, Dholpur
