* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 5778/2005 YASHWANT KUMAR ..... Petitioner Through Mr. M K Bhardwaj, Adv. versus DISTRICT & SEESION JUDGE DELHI ..... Respondent Through Ms. Latika Chowdhary, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA O R D E R % 08.05.2008 1. Rule. With the consent of the parties the matter is taken up for final disposal. 2. It is admitted case that the petitioner, Mr. Yashwant Kumar, has been convicted for an offence under section 304B/498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code vide judgment dated 20.2.2001. The appeal is pending against said judgment before the High Court. 3. Pursuant to the conviction of the petitioner, by an order dated 16.3.2005 the petitioner was dismissed from service. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner impugns the said order on the ground that procedure prescribed under Rule 19(i) of the CCS (CCA) Rules was not followed. The relevant portion of the rule reads as under : “19. Special procedure in certain cases Notwithstanding anything contained in Rule 14 to Rule 18- (i) Where any penalty is imposed on a Government servant on the ground of conduct which has led to his conviction on a criminal charge, or …………………………………………… ………………………………………... the Disciplinary Authority may consider the circumstances of the case and make such orders thereon as it deems fit : [Provided that the Government servant may be given an opportunity of making representation on the penalty proposed to be imposed before any order is made in a case under Clause (i) :” 5. It is stated that no opportunity was given to the petitioner to make a representation before order of dismissal dated 16.3.2005 was passed. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent admits that no opportunity was granted to the petitioner to make any representation. However, learned counsel for the petitioner does not dispute the factual position mentioned in the order dated 16.3.2005. 6. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, I feel that the petitioner should be permitted to make a representation to the District and Sessions Judge, Delhi as provided in proviso to Rule 19(1). The representation made by the petitioner will be considered by the District Judge, Delhi within a period of one month from the date of receipt, and a speaking order will be passed dealing with the said representation without being influenced by the observations and the order dated 16.3.2005. If the representation of the petitioner is allowed and appropriate order will also be passed by the District and Sessions Judge in respect of back wages as provided in Fundamental Rule 54. In view of the above observations the writ petition is disposed of. SANJIV KHANNA, J. MAY 08, 2008 Vld/P