Public Servant-Police Officer, dismissal of-Police Regulations, whether mandatory -Disregard of, if invalidates disciplinary action--Authorities empowered to take action--If exercise powers of Governor-Police Act, 1861 (V of 1861), s. 7-U. P. Police Regulations, para. 486-Constitution of India, Art. 154, 309, 370, 311.
The respondent was a sub-Inspector of Police. A complaint was received by the Superintendent of Police that the complainant was carrying currency notes of Rs. 650 in a bundle when he was stopped by the respondent and his person was searched, that the respondent opened the bundle of notes and handed over the notes one by one to one Lalji, who was with him and that Lalji returned the notes to him but on reaching
home he found the notes short by Rs. 250. Proceedings under s. 7 of the Police Act were taken against the respondent on the charge of misappropriation of Rs. 250 and he was dismissed from service by an order of the Deputy Inspector General of Police. The respondent filed a writ petition before the High Court challenging the order of the dismissal on the ground that the authorities had acted in violation of Rule 1 of Para. 486 of the U. P. Police Regulation. This rule required that every information received by the police relating to the commission of a cognizable offence by a Police Officer shall be dealt with in the first place under Ch. XIV, Code of Criminal Procedure. The High Court held that the provisions of para. 486 of the Police Regulations had not been observed and that the proceedings taken under s. 7 of the Police Act were invalid and illegal and accordingly quashed the order of dismissal. The appellant contended (i) that the complaint did not make out any cognizable offence against the respondent and r. I of Para. 486 was not applicable in this case, (ii) that r. III of Para. 486 enabled the authorities to initiate departmental proceedings without complying with the provisions of r. I, (iii) that the Police Regulations made in exercise of the power conferred on the Government under the Police Act delegating the power of the Governor to dismiss at pleasure to a subordinate officer were only administrative directions for the exercise of the pleasure in a reasonable manner and any breach oi the regulations did not confer any right or give a cause of action to the public servant, and (iv) that the regulations were only directory and the non-compliance with the rules did not invalidate the order of dismissal.
Full Text