CWP No.18778 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Civil Writ Petition No.18778 of 2011 Date of decision: 4.10.2011 Sham Lal ...Petitioner Versus Financial Commissioner, Revenue & others ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA Present: Mr. R.K. Aggarwal, Advocate for the petitioner. Rajan Gupta, J (oral). The petitioner seeks a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash enquiry report dated 30th August, 2006 and consequent orders Annexures P-2, P-3 & P-4, passed against him. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the Inquiry Officer committed a grave error while considering factual aspects of the matter and the authorities passed orders imposing a major penalty by merely relying upon said report. Thus, enquiry report and all subsequent orders deserve to be quashed. According to him, petitioner acted in bonafide manner while sanctioning mutation in the name of son of deceased Pritam Singh on the basis of will. This aspect was lost sight of by the Inquiry Officer. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and given careful thought to the facts of the case. It appears that the matter pertains to the period when CWP No.18778 of 2011 2 petitioner was posted as Patwari at Phool Pyara, Tehsil Pathankot. A charge-sheet was issued on the allegation that he had made interpolation in a mutation order and thus, altered the entry. Mutation entry regarding mutation No.1181 pertaining to will executed by one Harbans Kaur was made in favour of her son Pritam Singh on the basis of oral will. The entry was made on 16th December, 2004 and report was submitted by Field Kanungo on 31st January, 2005. The mutation was sanctioned by Circle Revenue Officer on 7th February, 2005. However, petitioner, who was the Patwari erased the aforesaid mutation on Parat Patwar and altered the entry in favour of all the natural successors. On being summoned pursuant to the charge-sheet, the petitioner appeared before the Inquiry Officer and admitted all the allegations levelled against him. The Inquiry Officer, thus, came to the conclusion that petitioner was guilty of misusing his official position while making interpolation in a public document. The matter thereafter went to Deputy Commissioner, Gurdaspur being the disciplinary authority. After perusing the record and granting opportunity of personal hearing to petitioner, he came to the conclusion that charges against him were correct. He, thus, directed stoppage of five annual increments with cumulative effect. The petitioner preferred an appeal before the Commissioner, Jalandhar Division, Jalandhar, who came to same conclusion and dismissed the appeal. Likewise, revision petition preferred before the Financial Commissioner was also dismissed. The contention of the petitioner that the Inquiry Officer had ignored certain facts from consideration while CWP No.18778 of 2011 3 holding the petitioner guilty, is devoid of merit. On issuance of show cause notice, the petitioner appeared before the Inquiry Officer and admitted his guilt. He was not able to bring any new fact to the notice of the disciplinary, appellate or revisional authority. Punishment of stoppage of five increments with cumulative effect was, thus, imposed upon him. Learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to point out any infirmity, legal or otherwise, with the impugned order. Admittedly, the petitioner erased the entry on Parat Patwar and altered it in the name of natural successors of the deceased. The allegation is serious in nature. It appears that the authority concerned has already taken a lenient view in the matter. I am, thus, of the considered view that no interference in writ jurisdiction of this court is called for. The petition is without any merit and is hereby dismissed. (RAJAN GUPTA) JUDGE 4.10.2011 'rajpal'