IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP(T) No. 6254 of 2008. Decided on 27.07. 2010. _____________________________________________________ Rajinder Kumar Saroch. …Petitioner. -Versus- State of Himachal Pradesh and another. …Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 Yes. __________________________________________________________ For the petitioner. : Mrs. Ranjana Parmar, Advocate. For the respondents. : Mr. R.P. Singh, Assistant Advocate General. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rajiv Sharma, Judge (Oral): Disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the petitioner under Rule 14 of the CCS(CCA) Rules, 1965. The present disciplinary authority, i.e., Superintending Engineer, I. & P.H. Circle, Chamba has exonerated the petitioner from the charges levelled against him, but the originating disciplinary authority, i.e., Superintending Engineer, 11th Circle, H.P. PWD, Rampur Bushahr, under whom the petitioner was found guilty of shortages in store etc. objected to the decision of exoneration of present disciplinary authority before the appellate authority. 2. The Court is of the considered view that the matter cannot be permitted to be re-opened once the petitioner has been exonerated by the disciplinary authority at the instance of the originating disciplinary authority. The appellate authority has not 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. acted in accordance with law by taking the cognizance of the letter written by the originating disciplinary authority. 3. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The respondents are directed not to re-open the disciplinary proceedings and the same shall stand closed. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma) Judge July 27, 2010. (bhupender)