LPA No.237 of 2010 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh. LPA No.237 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: 22.02.2010 State of Haryana and others ....Appellants. Versus Kanwar Bhan ....Respondent. Coram:- Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adarsh Kumar Goel Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok Singh 1.Whether reporters of local news papers may be allowed to see judgement ? 2. To be referred to reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest ? Present: Ms Sushma Chopra, Addl. A.G., Haryana for the appellants. ... Alok Singh, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the record. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was working on the post of Assistant Registrar in the Cooperative Department of Haryana Government and he retired on 31.1.2005. While the petitioner was posted as Assistant Registrar, at Yamunanagar, a programme known as “SARKAR APKE Dwar” was organised by the Haryana Government on 4.2.2001, in which the then Chief Minister announced the suspension of the petitioner from service on the allegations of corruption and he was placed under suspension vide order dated 6.2.2001. The petitioner submitted an application dated 3.10.2001 praying for revocation of his suspension. Thereafter, the petitioner was issued charge sheet dated 27.3.2002. LPA No.237 of 2010 2 However, he was reinstated vide order dated 28.3.2002 pending inquiry. In the aforesaid chargesheet two charges were levelled against the petitioner of misconduct. During the pendency of the aforesaid chargesheet, the petitioner retired on 31.1.2005 but his retiral benefits were withheld. The petitioner made an application praying for release of his retiral benefits but no decision was taken by the respondents. Therefore, the petitioner filed CWP No.2243 of 2007 in which, this Court directed to complete the inquiry within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. Inspite of that, the inquiry was not concluded and the retiral benefits were also not released. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner again filed the writ petition, which was allowed by learned Single Judge, directing the respondents to release the retiral benefits to the petitioner with interest @ 10% p.a within one month from the date of receipt of copy of the order and also awarded costs of Rs.25,000/-. The aforesaid order has been challenged by filing the present appeal. 3. Undisputedly, the petitioner was placed under suspension vide order dated 6.2.2001 on the basis of memo dated 4.2.2001 issued by the Deputy Commissioner, as directed by the then Chief Minister in a public function (Sarkar Apke Dawar). Charge sheet dated 27.3.2002 contains the following two charges:- “1. That Shri Kanwar Bhan had only completed the inspection of 27 societies against the target number of 99 societies w.e.f 1.4.2000 to 16.2.2001 and as such he has failed to maintain his complete devotion to his duties. 2. That Shri Kanwar Bhan had registered the DPS Computers Cooperative Industrial Society keeping in view his self interest LPA No.237 of 2010 3 and without the prior approval of the Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies and as such violated the instructions of the Registrar Cooperative Societies, Haryana.” 4. Suspension of the petitioner was revoked and he was reinstated vide order dated 28.3.2002. The petitioner superannuated on 31.1.2005. However, disciplinary proceedings pursuant to charge sheet dated 27.3.2002 were not concluded and the petitioner was denied all the retirement benefits. He filed CWP No.2243 of 2007 in which, this Court directed to complete the inquiry within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. Ultimately, charges framed under the charge sheet dated 27.3.2002 were dropped vide order dated 10.4.2008. Meanwhile, the petitioner was issued show cause notice dated 13.7.2004 on the basis of an ex parte inquiry proposing to impose 5% cut in his pension. As per the petitioner, second charge sheet dated 15.4.2004 was never served upon him. 5. Learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition and imposed costs of Rs.25,000/.- recoverable from all the respondents. Learned Single Judge also observed that the petitioner has been harassed and humiliated and for harassment and humiliation caused to the petitioner liberty was granted to him to seek compensation by approaching appropriate forum, in accordance with law. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant, on being asked by us, could not point out what other charges were framed against the petitioner, which were not in the first charge sheet, which was dropped. Learned counsel for the appellant could not point out any material showing any disciplinary proceedings were ever initiated and concluded against the petitioner, in LPA No.237 of 2010 4 accordance with the law. 7. The only argument advanced by learned counsel for the appellant that second charge sheet was never put under challenge, hence learned Single Judge was not justified in making observations about the second charge sheet and penalty imposed of 5% cut in the pension of the petitioner. 8. While exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, this Court has jurisdiction to see any arbitrary or illegal exercise being done by either of the party. The moment respondents came with the plea that on the basis of second charge sheet, 5% cut was directed in pension, learned Single Judge was right in observing that the petitioner was being humiliated unnecessarily without any ground. As observed earlier, on being asked repeatedly by us, learned counsel for the appellant could not point out charge against the petitioner nor could he point out holding of any disciplinary inquiry pursuant to the second charge sheet against the petitioner. 9. In view of the above, we find no merit in the appeal. However, we are of the view that costs imposed under the facts and circumstances of the case by learned Single Judge, seems to be not justified. Deleting the part of payment of costs, we confirm the judgement passed by learned Single Judge. 10. The appeal is dismissed. ( Alok Singh ) Judge ( Adarsh Kumar Goel ) Judge 22.02.2010 sk.