In an order heard on board in a writ petition challenging a second departmental enquiry and suspension, the Single Judge restrained the petitioner from raising merits and stayed the hearing until the petitioner files a reply to the charge-sheet, explicitly reserving opinion on the primary issue.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
WP (S) No.866 of 2016
Yashwant Tandon son of Chaitram Tandon, aged about 42 years, resident of Dubey Colony, Mowa, P.S.-Mowa, Pandri, District-Raipur (CG)
---Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh through the Secretary, Panchayat & Rural Development Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur (CG)
2. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat, Raipur, DistrictRaipur (CG)
3. The Collector, Raipur, District-Raipur (CG)
4. The Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Arang, District Raipur (CG)
---Respondents
For Petitioner : Mr. Gautam Khetrapaol, Advocate For Res. No.1 and 3 : Mr. S.P.Kale, Dy.A.G.
Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal
Order on Board
08/04/2016
1. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that by order dated 3.12.2015, the petitioner has been subjected to suspension and charge-sheet has been served and departmental enquiry has been instituted. He would further submit that charges framed in this charge-sheet and charge-sheet issued earlier and concluded by order imposing punishment both are one and the same, therefore, present second departmental enquiry is not maintainable in law and deserves to be quashed.
2. Learned counsel for the State would submit that the petitioner has not filed his reply to the charge-sheet, therefore, the
2
petition is premature and the petitioner is free to file reply raising all such grounds in his reply.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner may be allowed to raise all the grounds which are raised in this petition including question of similarity of charges and non maintainability of second departmental enquiry before the Disciplinary Authority.
4. Prayer is fair and reasonable.
5. If such a question is raised before the Disciplinary Authority, the Disciplinary Authority would do well to consider and decide the said question in accordance with law expeditiously. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits of the matter.
6. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands finally disposed of. No order as to cost(s).
Sd/-
(Sanjay K. Agrawal)
JUDGE
B/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is restrained from raising questions regarding the maintainability of a second departmental enquiry and similarity of charges.
Whether the writ petition can be heard on merits in the absence of a reply to the charge-sheet.
Yashwant Tandon
State of Chhattisgarh through the Secretary, Panchayat & Rural Development Department
The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat, Raipur
The Collector, Raipur
The Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Arang
Sanjay K. Agrawal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
