HC quashes SPO’s disengagement, orders reinstatement with consequential benefits

23/09/2026

Srinagar, Sep 22: The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has quashed the disengagement of a Special Police Officer (SPO) who was removed from service over allegations of furnishing a fake date-of-birth document, holding that the action was taken without giving him an opportunity of hearing.
Justice M.A. Chowdhary allowed the writ petition filed by Mohammad Amin Rather of Bonigam, Kulgam, challenging the December 21, 2023 order of the Senior Superintendent of Police (Security), Kashmir, by which his services had been disengaged with immediate effect.
Rather, represented by Advocate Shuja-ul-Haq Tantray, had been engaged as an SPO in 2004. Following earlier litigation, he and other SPOs were subsequently absorbed/appointed as Constables through Government Order No. 155-Home of 2022 dated May 24, 2022.
The dispute arose after the petitioner claimed that his date of birth had been incorrectly recorded in the 2022 Government order as March 4, 1981 instead of January 1, 1973. According to the judgment, the police authorities had sought correction of the date after receiving a date-of-birth certificate and genuineness report from JKBOSE.
The respondents, however, alleged that Rather had deliberately produced fake and fabricated documents to suppress his actual age and secure his engagement as an SPO. They contended that his actual date of birth rendered him ineligible on the prescribed age criteria at the time of his original engagement.
The High Court noted that neither the disengagement order nor the official record indicated that any prior notice had been served upon the petitioner or an inquiry conducted before his removal.
The Court observed that where disengagement is founded on allegations carrying a stigma, the employee must at least be served with a show-cause notice and afforded a reasonable opportunity to defend himself.
Invoking the principle of audialterampartem - that no person should be condemned unheard - the Court held that proceeding against the petitioner on a stigmatic allegation without giving him an opportunity of hearing violated the principles of natural justice.
The High Court accordingly quashed the December 21, 2023 disengagement order and directed the authorities to reinstate Rather in service with consequential benefits. However, he would not be entitled to emoluments for the period between his disengagement and restoration to service.
The Court clarified that its decision would not prevent the authorities from revisiting the allegation regarding the purported fake date-of-birth certificate. Any such action, however, would have to be taken in accordance with due process after providing the petitioner an adequate opportunity of hearing.

Photo Gallery

BSE Sensex

NSE Nifty