Gujarat High Court
Hanifbhai Hasambhai Multani vs State Of Gujarat on 15 February, 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/6485/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 15/02/2024
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6485 of 2014
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK
================================================================
1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed
to see the judgment ?
2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy
of the judgment ?
4 Whether this case involves a substantial question
of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution
of India or any order made thereunder ?
================================================================
HANIFBHAI HASAMBHAI MULTANI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & 1 other(s)
================================================================
Appearance:
MR AMIT J SHAH(736) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MS NIRALI SARDA AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M.
PRACHCHHAK
Date : 15/02/2024
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Present petition is filed by the petitioner under Article 226
of the Constitution of India for the following reliefs:-
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/6485/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 15/02/2024
undefined
"(A) be pleased to issue writ of certiorari and/or in the
nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or
direction to quash and/or set aside the orders of the
disciplinary authority and the respondents as they are in
violation of principles of natural justice and/or otherwise
discriminatory.
(B) be pleased to pass such other and further
order/orders in the interest of justice in the facts and
circumstances of the case.
(C) Cost of this petition may please be provided for."
2. The facts of the petition, in nutshell, are that the petitioner
was employed as Unarmed Police constable in the year 1984 and
was serving in Surat city and thereafter he was transferred from
Surat city to Rajkot on 07.11.2001 on account of secret report /
information received by the Commissioner of Police Surat city.
That the petitioner preferred Special Civil Application No.11025
of 2011 challenging the transfer order before this Court whereby
this Court (Coram: Hon'ble Mr.Justice P. P. Majmudar) rejected
the petition on 20.01.2002. Thereafter, the Commissioner of
Police Rajkot city issued charge-sheet to the petitioner for
departmental inquiry on two grounds i.e. (i) for unauthorized
absence on duty of 715 days and (ii) for taking part in Student
Islamic Movement of India and he was suspended from the
service w.e.f. 24.10.2003. The Police Commissioner, Rajkot city
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/6485/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 15/02/2024
undefined
i.e. Disciplinary Authority dismissed the petitioner from the
service vide order dated 30.08.2008. Thereafter, the petitioner
preferred appeal before the Director General and Inspector
General of Police, Gujarat State and no any decision was taken in
appeal, he preferred Special Civil Application No.2069 of 2012 for
appropriate direction to decide the appeal as expeditiously as
possible. This Court (Coram: Hon'ble Mr.Justice R. M. Chhaya) has
disposed of the petition on 14.02.2012 and directed the
concerned authority to decide the appeal on its merits as
expeditiously as possible but not later than 31.05.2012.
Thereafter, respondent No.2 has dismissed the appeal and
against the order of dismissal of appeal, the petitioner has
preferred revision application before respondent No.1, which was
also dismissed and confirmed the order of the concerned
authorities.
3. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned orders,
the present petition is preferred.
4. Heard Mr.Amit Shah, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner and Ms.Nirali Sarda, learned Assistant Government
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/6485/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 15/02/2024
undefined
Pleader for the respondents at length. Perused the materials on
record.
5. Mr.Amit Shah, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
has submitted the same facts which are narrated in the memo of
the petition and has submitted that the petitioner was serving as
Unarmed Police Constable in Surat city and he was transferred
from Surat city to Rajkot city on account of certain secret
information. He has submitted that the Disciplinary Authority has
dismissed the petitioner from the service, against which, he had
preferred an appeal before respondent No.2 and respondent
No.2 dismissed the appeal and confirmed the order passed by
the Disciplinary Authority. He has submitted that against the
order passed by respondent No.2, the petitioner had preferred
revision application before respondent No.1 and respondent No.1
had confirmed the orders and, therefore, the impugned orders
passed by the authorities are required to be quashed and set
aside in the interest of justice. He has submitted that both the
authorities have without giving an opportunity of hearing to the
petitioner such orders have been passed. He has submitted that
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/6485/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 15/02/2024
undefined
the present petition deserves to be allowed and the impugned
orders of both the authorities deserve to be quash and set aside.
6. Ms.Nirali Sarda, learned Assistant Government Pleader
appearing for the respondents has objected the petitioner and
has referred to and relied upon the affidavit-in-reply. She has
submitted that the petitioner has committed misconduct and,
therefore, after considering the seriousness of the charge leveled
against the petitioner, the Disciplinary Authority has passed the
order on the ground of absenteeism and, therefore, there is no
any illegality committed by the authorities while passing the
impugned orders and no interference is required to be called for
in the present petition.
7. Having considered the submissions canvassed by learned
counsel appearing for the parties and considered the facts and
circumstances of the case and materials on record, it appears
that the petitioner was serving as Unarmed Police Constable and
due to secret information, he was transferred from Surat city to
Rajkot City and against the order of transfer, he had preferred
Special Civil Application No.11025 of 2001 which came to be
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/6485/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 15/02/2024
undefined
rejected. It appears that the Police Commissioner, Rajkot city
issued charge-sheet to the petitioner and he was suspended
from the service and, thereafter, he was dismissed from the
service and against the order of dismissal, he preferred an
appeal before respondent No.2 which came to be dismissed and
confirmed the order passed by the Disciplinary Authority. That
the petitioner had preferred revision application before
respondent No.1 which came to be dismissed and both the
authorities have without affording an opportunity of hearing to
the petitioner passed the said orders. In view of the above, I am
of the considered opinion that the case of the petitioner can be
considered by the concerned authority and decide the same
afresh within a reasonable time. Hence, the following order is
passed:
(a) The petition is partly allowed. The impugned orders
passed by the authorities are hereby quashed and set
aside.
(b) The petitioner is directed to file representation before the
Revisional Authority and the Revisional Authority shall
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/6485/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 15/02/2024
undefined
decide such representation afresh and pass appropriate
order in accordance with law and on merits after giving an
opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and/or his
representative.
(c) The Revisional Authority shall decide the representation
as early as possible preferably within a period of three
months from the date of receipt of the order. It is made
clear that the Revisional Authority shall pass appropriate
order without being influenced by the earlier observations
made by both the authorities.
8. With the above observations, the petition stands disposed
of accordingly. Rule is made absolute. Direct service is
permitted.
(HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK,J)
V.R. PANCHAL
