Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:27883 Court No. - 7 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 2481 of 2025 Petitioner :- Rohit Dhanked Respondent :- The State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ambuj Maurya,Atipriya Gautam,Madhaw Pandey,Sr. Advocate Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J. 1. The order dated 23.06.2023 passed by Respondent no. 3/The Senior Superintendent of Police, Mathura, District Mathura, is under challenged in the present petition. By the aforesaid order the petitioner was dismissed from his services. 2. It is argued that though a major penalty has been awarded to the petitioner but before passing the same the Enquiry Officer has not provided proper opportunity to the petitioner and has not provided the statements of the witnesses for doing proper cross-examination of the witnesses, and the Enquiry Officer has not provided the opportunity of the oral enquiry to the petitioner as such the whole departmental proceeding is in violation of Principle of natural justice. He also placed reliance upon the judgment and order dated 11.02.2025 passed by this Court in Writ A No. 691 of 2024 (Ompal Singh Vs. State of U.P. and 5 Others). Order reads as follows:- "1. Heard Sri Prashant Shukla, learned counsel for petitioner and learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of State-respondents. 2. The Superintendent of Police, Sitapur has passed the order of punishment by awarding removal from service on 15.06.2023 and the appeal has been rejected by Inspector General of Police, Lucknow Range, Lucknow vide order dated 23.11.2023, which have been challenged in this writ petition. 3. Under Rule 14(1) of U.P.Police Officers of Subordinate Rank (Punishment & Appeal) Rules, 1991, enquiry officer can make recommendation regarding punishment but it has to be separate recommendation and should not be part of the enquiry report. Strangely enough in this case I find that not only the enquiry officer has concluded that the petitioner was guilty but he has recommended the punishment exercising the power under sub-section 4(1)(Ka) of Rule 14(1)(Ka) of the Rules. This power was not available to the enquiry officer as he was not the appointing authority. Since the enquiry officer recommended the punishment which at the most can be treated as recommendation, impugned order becomes vitiated, liable to be quashed by this Court. 4. Writ petition is allowed. The order dated 15.06.2023 passed by respondent no.4, Superintendent of Police, Sitapur and order dated 30.11.2023 passed by respondent No.3-Inspector General of Police, Lucknow Range, Lucknow, are quashed. The petitioner is directed to be reinstated in service with full arrears of salary within two weeks. 5. It would be open to the Superintendent of Police, Sitapur to order fresh enquiry in the matter from the stage of conclusion of evidence by department. " 3. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record. 4. Under Rule 14(1) of U.P.Police Officers of Subordinate Rank (Punishment & Appeal) Rules, 1991, enquiry officer can make recommendation regarding punishment but it has to be separate recommendation and should not be part of the enquiry report. Strangely enough in this case I find that not only the enquiry officer has concluded that the petitioner was guilty but he has recommended the punishment exercising the power under sub-section 4(1)(Ka) of Rule 14(1)(Ka) of the Rules. This power was not available to the enquiry officer as he was not the appointing authority. Since the enquiry officer recommended the punishment which at the most can be treated as recommendation, impugned order becomes vitiated, liable to be quashed by this Court. 5. Writ petition is allowed. The order dated 23.06.2023 passed by Respondent no. 3/The Senior Superintendent of Police, Mathura, District Mathura, is quashed. The petitioner is directed to be reinstated in service with full arrears of salary within two weeks. 6. It would be open to the Superintendent of Police, Mathura to order fresh enquiry in the matter from the stage of conclusion of evidence by department. Order Date :- 27.2.2025 Arti Digitally signed by :- ARTI SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad