Allowed

Krishan Gopal Gupta v. State

Rajasthan HC15 Jan 2019CW/1719/1999

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court held that the disciplinary authority acted illegally by imposing compulsory retirement without issuing a notice for disagreement to the petitioner regarding unproven charges. The penalty was set aside, and the petitioner's suspension period was counted for service benefits, pension, and arrears.

What did the court decide?

The order of compulsory retirement dated 6.12.1995 was quashed. The period of suspension from 25.8.1993 to 6.12.1995 shall be counted as service for pension, gratuity, and leave benefits.

Krishan Gopal Gupta Vs State — Service and Employment | Rajasthan HC (2019)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writs No. 1719/1999

¶3

Krishan Gopal Gupta

¶4

-;--Petitioner

¶5

Versus
State
----Respondent
r, Go n &tedlWiithw
d ;'3& S911d 9 a ilbs 'Tr.*hi.
, '?A. .A 3 .2% rT, q tp 6' y$"+
$3.liv'il Writs No. 6186~&0lJIa
c.. F" %
Krishan o.&l~*~~~~ta % Dead Through Legal
%. b
Gupta Wif@#6/244, S.f.s. Hans Vihar, Agarwal
J a i p u r<3&$Jjved Ay u rved Officer.
T
Of Rajasthan
The Secretary,
Of Personnel,
Of Rajasthan, Raj,
cretary Ayurved Medical
Services,
Rajasthan,
partment Of
Government Of
~wTTwe~~p -- d pzr~~~ ,,Raj -.& astbia.n, a .& J a i p u r.
m-s- %" 0 $ *vxj q %q 'b4& r, *?_% 4
~ajssthan Civil Service
Appellate Tribunal, Through Its
Secretary, Banipark, Jaipur.

¶6

For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Rajendra Vaish For Respondent(s) : Mr.B.L.Avasthi

¶7

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA

¶8

Judqment / Order

(2 of 7)

v1719/1999]

15/01/2019

I. The short question involved in the present petition is whether the petitioner would be punished for the charges which have been found to be not proved by the Enquiry Officer without giving the petitioner a notice for dis-agreement.

¶13

The petitioner during the pendency of the writ petitions has

¶14

-%r Pr?' expired and his L.Rs. haveue'en tdkennrecord. f- h &-$&kf;B- c+" g qi/2f- (3 & ..'"p&+ Ld @-) 4k 3. The .bbt:tioner was served with a chatpsheet w yJ& memord&m dated 25.4.1991 whereby 13 charges w$.?.gev against the petition appointed to submit his enquiry report. port was submitted by the Enquiry offic rges to be proved as alleged against th quiry report was made available to the p y Authority did not send any notice of dis-ag any of the charge, nor a show cause not he petitioner. However, vide order dated 6.1 thority proceeded to punish the petit er of compulsory retirement dis-agreein izndi.ng&.of En q u i ry Officer. The xgp&rj _i;%_ -5' 'z'k3 Disciplinary Authority dis-agreed with the findings of Enquiry officer relating to charge n0s.1~2 & 9.

¶15

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the Disciplinary Authority could not have adopted such a course of action before giving him an opportunity of hearing on the point of disagreement. Counsel relies on the judgments passed in the case of Puniab National Bank and ors. Vs. Kuni Behari Misra

¶16

reported in (1998) 7 SCC 84, Yoqinath D.Baade Vs. State of Maharashtra reported in 1999(7) SCC, 739; Pawan Kumar Aqarwala Vs. General Manaaer-I1 and Appointinq Authoritv, State Bank of India and ors. reported in (2015) 15 SCC 184, and State of Raiasthan throuqh the Secretarv. Home Department, Raiasthan, Jaipur Vs. Navneet Kumar Raipurohit reported in 2017 (1) WLC (Raj.) UC 11. 1

¶17

Counsel

¶18

frankly

¶19

.petitioner.

¶20

I have heard I rties and find that the case of Punjab the Apex court held under:

¶21

" 18. . ., .. . . . . . . .When iffers with the view of the inquiry officer an onclusion, there is no reason as to why ot be granted. It will be most unfair and ged officers succeed before the inqui resenting to the A.~.W.~ x .<,' **_>Y"'&,_* -,$ w$%~%~ws+> disciplinary authority bef~$t&t .---a+% -z duthq$tydE<r$ith a "S the inquiry officer's report and, while recording of guilt, imposes punishment on the officer. In our opinion, in any such situation the charged officer must have an opportunity to represent before the Disciplinary Authority before final findings on the charges are recorded and punishment imposed.

¶22

.. . ...... As a result thereof whenever the disciplinary authority disagrees with the inquiry authority on any article of charge then before it records its own findings on such charge, it must record its tentative reasons for such disagreement and give to the delinquent officer an opportunity to represent before it records its findings. The report of the inquiry officer containing its findings will have to be conveyed and the delinquent officer

¶23

will have an opportunity to persuade the disciplinary authority to accept the favorable conclusion of the inquiry officer. The principles of natural justice, as we have already observed, require the authority, which has to take a final decision and can impose a penalty, to give an opportunity to the officer charged of misconduct to file a representation before the disciplinary authority records its findings on the charges framed against the officer.

¶24

The Apex Court in the case of Pawan Kumar Agarwala (supra) held as under:

¶25

For th . .. the case *$- .g9 tbJ threadbareyethe basis of the material placed on recoe and rival w3 .-,& q 4 " legalT$'cotQntions urged on behalf of the parties, we hold thatithe % @$ f *qp4 findjng of the enquiry officer on the charges is vitiated on accopt3 "I"r of non-compliance of the statutory Rules and the principles of natural iustice. In the ab evidence, the order of reinstatement sans the High Court s the amount of pension received for the period in qu the orders of the learned Single Judge f the High Court are liable to be set aside wit t of full back wages. 26. Accordi Division Bench the order of the instatement with full back wages for moval till the date - ---"- - - of periodical revisions of salary,to the appellant herein and deduct wv*qwe""k& w. . -.%%w& the pension amount frymthe a%U x% 4 ?b,adk $j #' - a gy%~ e'& a able 4 to the appellant. The same shall be paid to the appellant w~thin eight weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. The appeal is allowed in the aforesaid terms, directions and observations.

¶26

Thus this court safely concludes that the punishment cannot be awarded by Disciplinary Authority on charges which have not been proved by Enquiry Officer unless the Disciplinary Authority serve upon the delinquent a notice mentioning therein the point for which he dis-agrees with the findings of Enquiry Officer. Each

¶27

point of dis-agreement must be specified and the ground for disagreement should also be mentioned. The concerned delinquent will then allow to submit his reply to the points of dis-agreement and if he is not allowed for personal hearing, opportunity ought to be provided. This is so as the Disciplinary Authority would be acting as an enquiry officer. Once he disagrees with the report of enquiry officer, thereafter the Disciplinary Authority would be free to take a

¶28

adopted, is vitiated

¶29

the e punishment order date d 6.12.1995, th ompulsory retirement is held. to be illegal an

¶30

The connected W Pet. No.6186/2010

¶31

relation to suspension where the ~etitioner has assailed the order passed by the has partly allowed the

¶32

appeal of the petitioner directing that the petitioner-deceased would be entitled to receive pension, gratuity on the last pay drawn and the amount recovered from the gratuity, pension would be paid back to the deceased petitioner. However, deceasedpetitioner's period of suspension has been discounted for the purpose of pension. Having held the punishment order of compulsory retirement as bad and having found that Enquiry

¶33

(6 of 7)

¶34

[CW-1719/1999]

¶35

Officer had not found the charges to be proved against the petitioner, the necessary corollary under Rule 54 of the Rules is that the petitioner's entire period of suspension has to be counted as he remained in service and hence he would be entitled for service benefits for the suspension period.

¶36

In view

¶37

22.1.2009 has suspension period from-'%3&;3.89 to 6.12.95 shall be period

¶38

period from-'%3&;3.89 to 6.12.95 shall be 9 Y*f k and petiti~ner XI would be entitled for 7,

¶39

increments for the said perio

¶40

I Accordingly, bo allowed. The legal representatives of peti led to all consequential benefits. The petitioners 2 in se rvice upto the date he was in normal cour nnuation and would be entitled for fixation o ingly, arrears thereto shall be released. Th petitioner would also be re-calculated accordingly from the date he actually attained --i+ ~~(qa superannuation and b he earned leave shall also be released to the L.Rs of deceased. The entire arrears shall be paid to the LRs of deceased and revised gratuity amount shall also be calculated and arrears thereof shall also be released. The entire exercise shall be conducted within a period of three months from the date of submission of certified copy of this order and interest on the said amount shall be paid @ 6% per annum. It goes without saying that if the order is not complied with, the L.Rs of

t "

(7 of 7)

[CW-1719/19?9]

*' *

deceased petitioner would be free to initiate contempt

¶46

3 proceedings against the concerned persons without further delay.