Punjab Haryana High Court: DSP Gursher Sandhu Dismissal Quashed

• The Punjab and Haryana High Court ordered the reinstatement of DSP Gursher Sandhu, quashing his dismissal by the state government.
• Sandhu was dismissed last year over allegations he facilitated a TV interview of gangster Lawrence Bishnoi while Bishnoi was in police custody in Mohali.
• The court ruled that the state's decision to dismiss Sandhu under Article 311(2)(b) without a departmental inquiry failed to meet the required constitutional standard.
• Justice Namit Kumar delivered the judgment in the case of Gursher Singh Sandhu v State of Punjab and Other on September 1.
• The High Court clarified that while the dismissal was quashed, the State is permitted to resume an earlier departmental inquiry against Sandhu.

The court's decision, delivered by Justice Namit Kumar on September 1, specifically quashed the order that had removed DSP Gursher Sandhu from service.

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has mandated the reinstatement of a Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP), Gursher Singh Sandhu, whose dismissal by the Punjab government last year was overturned. The court's decision, delivered by Justice Namit Kumar on September 1, specifically quashed the order that had removed DSP Gursher Sandhu from service. This ruling centered on the state's failure to meet the stringent constitutional requirements for bypassing a formal inquiry.

Sandhu's dismissal stemmed from allegations that he facilitated a television interview of gangster Lawrence Bishnoi while Bishnoi was in police custody. The interviews, broadcast by ABP Sanjha in March 2023, became a point of contention, leading to the DSP's removal. At the time these interviews were recorded, Bishnoi, who is also an accused in the high-profile Sidhu Moosewala murder case, was in the custody of the CIA Staff in Mohali. Sandhu was posted in Mohali during this period and was accused of assisting journalist Jagw in conducting the interview.

The Punjab government had dismissed DSP Gursher Sandhu under the provisions of Article 311(2)(b) of the Constitution. This particular article grants the State the authority to terminate an employee's service without conducting a regular departmental inquiry, under specific circumstances. However, the High Court found that the justification provided by the competent authority for dispensing with such an inquiry did not align with the prescribed constitutional standard.

The judgment in Gursher Singh Sandhu v State of Punjab and Other underscored that merely citing Article 311(2)(b) is insufficient; the 'satisfaction recorded' by the authority must rigorously adhere to the constitutional benchmarks. By ruling that this standard was not met, the court effectively invalidated the basis for Sandhu's immediate dismissal. This decision highlights the strict interpretation of Article 311(2)(b) and the high bar for bypassing due process in government employment.

While the High Court quashed the DSP Gursher Sandhu dismissal, it also clarified that the State retains the option to resume an earlier departmental inquiry that had been initiated against him. This inquiry, which was pending before retired Justice Rajiv Narain Raina, had been prematurely closed following the government's decision to dismiss Sandhu without a formal investigation. The court's ruling thus distinguishes between the procedural impropriety of the dismissal and the potential validity of the underlying allegations.

This outcome reinforces the critical importance of procedural fairness for government employees, even when serious allegations are involved. The emphasis on the 'departmental inquiry dispensed constitutional standard' under Article 311(2)(b) sets a significant precedent, ensuring that authorities cannot arbitrarily bypass established inquiry mechanisms. It serves as a reminder that while the State has powers to dismiss employees, these powers are subject to strict constitutional oversight, particularly when due process is curtailed.

This ruling clarifies the strict constitutional standard required for dispensing with a departmental inquiry under Article 311(2)(b), providing a precedent for challenging arbitrary dismissals of government employees without due process. Lawyers advising public sector employees or government departments should note this emphasis on procedural fairness and the high bar for bypassing formal inquiries.

Source: Original reporting via Bar and Bench