IN THE HIGii COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION N0. 2-^ I 2- /2006 PETITIONER RESPONDENTS ^ .^ r°\^ j l.^: ^w <^^ .-»• <3>,I ">v L»* y CH^ ^&^ ^ ^' :>• r ^-" Sayed Haider Ali Jafri s/o Sayed Mohd. Ali Jafri aged about 54 years r/o Dharampura-3, Jagdalpur (C.G.) Versus l^ State of Chhattisgarh -Through- The Coltector Jagdalpur (C.G) 2. A.K.Vijayvargey, Transport Commissioner, Raipur (C.G) at present Information Commissioner, Raipur (C.G) 3. R.K.Vig, Deputy Transport Commissioner, Transport Commissioner Office, At present - DIG (CID), head quarter Raipur (C.G.) 4. R.P.Bagai, Transport Commissioner At present Chief Secretary , Raipur 5. B.L.Dhruv, Regional Transport Officer, Jagdalpur (C.G), At Present ^ Assistant Transport Commissioner Raipur (C.G) 6. Under Secretary, Transport Office, ^ DKS Bhawan, Raipur (C.G) 7. Vijay Kumar Karvey, Assistant .Transport Commissioner (Legal), Raipur (C.G) 8. Transport Commissioner, Bus ^ Stand Premises, Raipur (C.G) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF IN DIA XI-HC-22 ?s[ ^ww^, »fli<H'is, r«i<viiy'i< sn^i^iiT Wl<h 3^1 sfi+ii^ <if?a sn^r ^ra? tlllCTI thHiqi '^A^^^s^y^ |c|fc<ff' SII^t ?RIIWdf?!T 11.5-2006 Shri A.B.K. Rao, eounse! for Shri Ashutosh Kachchwaha!, respondents No.1, S snd 8. i' have heard learned couns4 writ petition. fn this writ petition, the p-etitii for initiating departn'sntai ©nquiry] rsspondents to _reinstaie the ^ respondents to give the- origina! senj The petitloner's case is thatl iner has prayed for quashing the order sgssirsst the pstitiop.^r. dir^cting the .etitioner and fyrther directina tha oriiy and consequentia! benefits. the petitioner was working.as LDC in pentloner was suspended on the g| the public sxehequsr on account of ../ tHerefora, h®was susoendsd vids was issued on 13-9-2001 without e was also iodged in th° Pollce Stai Poiics charge sheet and deniad charaesl provided in spite of rsquesi of the^ appea! for rsvocation of ths Impug] decidcd. The enquiry officer has n| "ominee. At the time of areuments, tei his prayer^to the extent thaS the pet pending against him since 2001 +i'I<I<-i41'< 'qn^T'? is^S <r«i'%i< •^T srfigH aii^l h®petfflonsr. Gbvt. Advocate takes nottee for the tor the petitidner on admission of thls th& office of Regionai Transport fluthority, Jagdaipur slnce 1978. The 'ouna that he caused revenue ioss to |his irraguiarity and nsgiigeni aeti'.'ities, 1-dsr datsd 19-4-2001. A chargs shest |ic!osing documents. A crimina! report fon Jagdalpur on 11-3-2001 i" wnich oiics GSosed ttie case vlde Krtatnlia No.101/03. The petitloner rspiled The reievant documents were not petitiQner. The petitioner moyed an |isd order. The enquiry is not bsing i|ot ailowed hlm tu appolnt his defence jrned counsei for the petitioner limited Ifioner is under suspension, enquiw i's ^nd that is not being completed by [Tft^ ife^.,.- XI-HC-22 .sn^CT^T h-1M S^V ?bfl •tifsfl -^ o'ap/'e u \v ^sg -41'i|id'il, »Tfl'H'is,ftcll'ay 1WCTI shlicb •M 200 ft^T' sn^i'gBirwHfer ^ enquiry officer, ihersfore, enquiry 4 at the sarlisst afisr apposniing defe|n reQmcd counsei for f^spondBnts N< counsei for the pet'tioner furthet nominee has not been appointsd so| Haying heard iearned coun^ai the facts and circumstances of the ysars time rsas elapsed anci enqij the othsr rsason, in thc Circuiyi3tan4cS enquiry expeditiousiy ny fo'!owing| Rules. The concemed depariment| if aireaay not appointecs so far, withj officer has not accepted nominati( 1.1, 6 and 8 has no objection. Leamed (• submitted that even departmenta! Ifar. jai for the parties and having regard to (ase, as enquiry is pending since 2001, ^iry has not bssn complstod for QH9 or >., en^ulry' olficsr is dlroct&d to dscide "ominee, tnen ns snouid permrt nominee In accordancs wiih Rutes te 6 months in accordance wi'th Ruie^, also reqyjred to sxtend aii sxpedltiousdisposalortiieenquiry. With the direction aforesaid, <? Part'es are entifed for cemfiey ^il^ici^l'l 'qTTRff^ 'f^st <f^<-il< ^aiPaHan^T fficer be directed w compiete enquiry nce nominee of ihe Dstitlonsr to which On proeedure as envisaged under CCA Ishould appoint departmentai nominee, in a Deriod of one montn. If the enauin/ made by the.petitioner for defence [ths petinoner to appoint his defsnce ^nd te dscids snquiry wsthin a psriod of t, It is mads elear that the petifioner is ccxl'peration to ths snqus'ry omcer for he petition stands disposed of. copy of mis order- Sd.i- t_.C. Bhaduo Judge ['Ht^tfe^