VIGILANCE MANUAL VOLUME III - AP Online

226 DECISION - 24
on misconduct, negligence, inefficiency or other disqualification, then
it is a punishment and the requirement of Art. 311 must be complied
with.
Applying the principles of law discussed above, the Supreme
Court in the instant case held that the petitioner was appointed to the
higher post on officiating basis, that is to say, he was appointed to
officiate in that post which means he was appointed only to perform
the duties of that post. He had no right to continue in that post and
under the general law the implied term of such appointment was that
it was terminable at any time on reasonable notice by the Government
and, therefore, his reduction did not operate as a forfeiture of any
right and could not be described as reduction in rank by way of
punishment.
(24)
Principles of natural justice — bias
In disciplinary proceedings, presiding officer himself
giving evidence violates principle of natural justice.
State of Uttar Pradesh vs. Mohammad Nooh,
AIR 1958 SC 86
The respondent was a Constable in the Uttar Pradesh Police
Force and was officiating as Head Constable at the material time.
He was placed under suspension on 15-3-48 as he was suspected
to be responsible for creation of a forged letter purporting to have
been issued selecting him for training in the Police Training College.
Under section 7 of the Police Act, read with the Uttar Pradesh Police
Regulations, a departmental enquiry, called ‘trial’ in the Regulations,
was started against the respondent, and Sri B.N. Bhalla, District
Superintendent of Police held the trial and found him guilty and passed
an order of dismissal against him. Departmental appeal and revision
were dismissed.
The main contention before the Supreme Court was that Sri
B.N. Bhalla, who presided over the trial, also gave his own evidence
in the proceedings at two stages and had thus become disqualified
from continuing as the judge, as he was bound to be biased against