CWP No.18515 of 2007 - 1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CWP No.18515 of 2007 Date of Decision: 14.1.2008 Vivek Padam Singh ............. Petitioner Versus The State of Haryana and others. ..............Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH. Present:- Mr.AK Chopra,Senior Advocate with Mr.ND Kalra,Advocate for the petitioner. ***** JASBIR SINGH, J.(ORAL) The petitioner was issued a charge sheet vide memo dated 10.8.2006 (Annexure P-2) proposing to take action against him under Rule 7 of the Haryana Civil Services (Punishment and Appeal) Rules,1987 for imposition of major penalty. He was further informed that for the purpose of preparing his written statement, if he wishes to have access to relevant official records, he could inspect the same in the office of Commissioner, Gurgaon Division, Gurgaon on any working day. It was also mentioned that his failure to inspect the documents shall not constitute a valid ground for delay in the submission of written statement. The petitioner, instead of filing his reply in time, kept on asking for supply of certain documents. It appears from the perusal of Annexures on record that he was trying to avoid filing of the reply on one pretext or the other. Finally, the office of Chief Secretary, Haryana, issued a letter dated 3.8.2007 (Annexure P-16) directing the petitioner to submit his reply positively by 15.8.2007. The petitioner CWP No.18515 of 2007 - 2- instead of filing his reply vide his letter dated 13.8.2007 (Annexure P-17) insisted for supply of a copy of order dated 14.6.2007 passed in appeal by the Collector-cum-Deputy Commissioner, Gurgaon. The government, thereafter, without waiting for the reply to the charge sheet passed order dated 12.9.2007 (Annexure P-18) appointing Sh. Krishan Kumar Jalari, IAS as an Enquiry Officer to hold departmental enquiry, into the charges, against the petitioner. Hence the present writ petition challenging the charge sheet dated 10.8.2006 (Annexure P-2) and the order dated 12.9.2007 (Annexure P-18) appointing the Enquiry Officer. We find that challenge to charge sheet dated 10.8.2006 is not maintainable in view of the well settled principle of law, that ordinarily no writ lies against a charge sheet, we are supported in that view by the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Union of India and another v. Kunisetty Satyanarayana (2006) 12 SCC 28. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also laid challenge to the order dated 12.9.2007 (Annexure P-18) on the ground that non-supply of the copy of the order dated 14.6.2007 passed in appeal by Collector-cum- Deputy Commissioner, Gurgaon, precluded him from filing his reply in time before the appointment of the Enquiry Officer. It is apparent from the records that from 10.8.2006, the petitioner was given many opportunities to inspect the relevant record from the concerned office(s) but it appears that he was intentionally delaying the filing of his reply by insisting on supply of documents, which he otherwise could have inspected and obtained. We are satisfied that during more than one year sufficient opportunities had been granted to the petitioner to inspect the records and CWP No.18515 of 2007 - 3- file his reply before the appointment of the Enquiry Officer. Therefore, we find no reason to interfere with the charge sheet dated 10.8.2006 (Annexure P2-) and order dated 12.9.2007 (Annexure P- 18). However, we permit the petitioner to file a detailed reply to the charges levelled against him before the Enquiry Officer within a period of 15 days from today. On his doing so, the Enquiry Officer, shall consider the same while proceedings further in the matter. The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. (Jasbir Singh) Judge 14.1.2008. (Jaswant Singh) gk/joshi Judge