The chief received word on Monday that his latest appeal of a ruling last February that quashed 24 Police Services Act charges against Sgt. Kevin Dhinsa has been denied.

Three Ontario Superior Court of Justice divisional court judges had already unanimously rejected the chief’s bid last December for a judicial review of the case.

The Ontario Court of Appeal this week informed the chief it won’t review the lower-court ruling.

“It was our intent to have the Dhinsa matter heard on its merits and I am very disappointed,” Chief Mullan said in a media release.

Sgt. Dhinsa, who earns $85,500 per year, remains on paid leave, as he has since Dec. 6, 2005.

Police services board chair Bernie Morelli said his board will review “what options, if any, it  has” at its regular monthly meeting next Tuesday.

He said the discussion will take place behind closed doors because the board has asked for legal advice on how to proceed.

“Obviously, I was hoping for a better result,” Mr. Morelli said.

“I certainly think that it’s fair to say that I think we’d all like to see closure as soon as possible, for many reasons,” he said.

“But we aren’t going to forgo our pursuit of achieving justice for all. That’s been one of the major forces behind this.”

The legal saga began in February of last year, when a disciplinary tribunal’s hearing officer, Robert Fitches — who was appointed to hear the case by Chief Mullan — quashed all charges against Sgt. Dhinsa after finding they were filed eight days too late.

He concluded the statutory deadline for filing them was June 6, 2006, six months after Sgt. Dhinsa was suspended with pay. The chief laid the charges on June 14, 2006.

A retired OPP superintendent, Mr. Fitches ruled Chief Mullan had ample evidence of misconduct at the time of Sgt. Dhinsa’s suspension, noting  the officer had turned in his badge and all 12 complainants had been interviewed.

“It would seem to me that unless there were significant discrepancies between or among the complainants in these matters, there would be a significant body of facts upon which to make a decision regarding whether or not to proceed with disciplinary actions,” he wrote in his 12-page ruling.

Chief Mullan and the 12 complainants sought a judicial review of the ruling, but the divisional court judges unanimously concluded the Police Services Act gave them no standing to do so.

The denial of the appeal leaves the police board in a difficult position given the startling nature of the disciplinary charges.

According to his accusers, Sgt. Dhinsa pestered women officers to meet him outside work, often using language laden with sexual overtones.

He allegedly targeted both married and single officers, making inappropriate comments, including about hair, breasts and appearance, and allegedly suggested one could reverse his denial of her requested vacation day by performing oral sex.

The charges were Sgt. Dhinsa’s second setback in his 18-year career. He had been demoted for nine months three years earlier after being convicted of impaired driving for crashing a police van near his Winona home while off-duty.

He was also fined and lost his licence for a year.

Sgt. Dhinsa is the second cop during Chief Mullan’s tenure to beat charges on a deadline technicality.

Charges against Constable Roy Fright — accused of showing up for weapons training after consuming alcohol — were also quashed in December 2006 because they were filed seven days too late.