Vijay Pawar had been discharged from service on the ground that he had not undergone police training.
Pawar moved the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal against his termination, which upheld the decision of the police administration. He then filed a petition in the High Court.
Hearing Pawar's plea, Justices A M Khanwilkar and P D Kode yesterday observed, "we find no reason to interfere with the decision of Tribunal which has rightly observed that the discharge order was passed simpliciter and as per the record it was necessitated, as the petitioner has not undergone police training and was not keen to undergo the same."
"The argument that the impugned discharge order is punitive does not commend to us. Police training is one of the basic requirement for absorbing the person in police service. In absence of it, the petitioner cannot claim right to be continued in service," the judges said.
The argument of the petitioner that due to unavoidable circumstances he could not undergo the requisite training also does not hold good, as he entered service in 2006 and the discharge order is passed on January 8, 2008, the bench observed.
The court was of the view that there was sufficient time for the petitioner to undergo the police training, which as per the record, he refused.
"That being question of fact, it is not possible for us to entertain the argument that the said fact is incorrect, in exercise of Writ Jurisdiction. Hence, the petition is dismissed," judges ruled.
