, 5/1-28/2014 1124-- , ( 608/03, , , , ,
199/, 21.02.2012 '' '' 1. ( , , , 125 500
65.75
, 4,
( 3 2. , ,
, , ,
3. 26/2007-08) 17.07.2007 2 (10,00,000/- ( 27/07-08) 20.09.2007 7,00,000/- ( , 01.10.2007 7,00,000/- ( 4. , 2254, 18.12.2007
8
, 98, 18.01.2008
,
, 346, 07.03.2008, 2254, 18.12.200798, 18.01.2008
,
-9961, 15.10.2013
, , 000, 372, 10.07.2014
,
, '' 13
,
1100, 10.02.2015 , 20.02.2015
,
0-5205, 10.06.2015 , 49(1) 2)
W.P.(S) No.-3790/2015 , 24.11.2020 , Operative part
"Para-9- Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going through the materials available on record, it appears that the Inquiry officer in his enquiry report has categorically stated that in the absence of evidence, the petitioner has been given benefit of doubt with respect to charge no.-I and III. However, from perusal of the second show cause notice, it appears that the Disciplinary Authority has stated that charge no.-I and III have been proved. This is so because instead of the enquiry report pursuant to the enquiry proceedings where the petitioner duly participated was not considered by the Disciplinary Authority; rather, he relied upon the internal Opinion/enquiry which was conducted on his direction and the same has been referred in the second show cause notice and also enclosed with it. However, the law is very clear that the Departmental Authority is having every right to differ with the view of the Inquiry officer, but in doing so, he will have to give a show cause notice by recording reasons to differ, which is absent in the instant case.
Para-10 - From the second show cause notice it further transpires that the respondents have pre-decided their mind in imposing punishment, inasmuch as, the internal (
3 opinion/enquiry which was conducted behind back of the petitioner has already referred for proposed punishment and the same was also placed before the Chief Minister. This is against the settled principles of law.
Para-11 - Further, from bare perusal of the impugned order of punishment it appears that the Disciplinary Authority has not applied his independent mind rather based his order on the opinion of the subordinate officers and had acted upon the their dictates which is against the principle of service jurisprudence.
Para-12 - In view of the cumulative facts and circumstances of the case and the judicial pronouncements referred to herein above, the impugned order as contained in Memo No.-5205 dated 10- 06-2015, is hereby, quashed and set aside. The Disciplinary Authority would be at liberty to start the proceeding afresh from the stage of serving of the second show cause notice and after receiving the reply pass a fresh order. It is made clear that since the matter is very old, the entire exercise shall be completed within a period of four months from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order. It goes without saying that the petitioner shall fully cooperate in the proceeding.
Para-13 - with the aforesaid observations and directions the instant writ application stands disposed of."
W.P.(S) No.-
W.P.(S) No.-
-------------