CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.12489 OF 2010 :{ 1 }: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH DATE OF DECISION: MAY 10 ,2011 Pawan Kumar .....Petitioner VERSUS Haryana State Legal Services Authority, Chandigarh and another ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? PRESENT: Mr. S. B. Kaushik, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms. Amita Arora, Advocate, for the respondents. **** RANJIT SINGH, J. A Clerk working in the office of District Attorney-cum- Member Secretary, District Level Legal Service and Advice Committee, Fatehabad, is accused of demanding a sum of `200/-, while issuing a cheque of `1000/- to an Advocate. On a complaint made by Advocate, namely, Sh.Inder Singh Sihag, the petitioner was proceeded against for this misconduct and dismissed from service. The petitioner has challenged his dismissal after having remained unsuccessful before the Appellate Authority. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.12489 OF 2010 :{ 2 }: The petitioner was appointed as a Clerk with Legal Services Authority on 18.11.1993. On 24.10.2007, an Advocate working at Fatehabad filed this complaint of illegal demand against the petitioner before Chief Judicial Magistrate, which he forwarded to the District Judge, Fatehabad, for onwards transmission to Member Secretary, Haryana State Legal Service Authority. The complaint was remitted back to the District and Sessions Judge, Fatehabad, for conducting preliminary enquiry. Grievance is that District and Sessions Judge only recorded the statement of the Advocate and submitted his report. Thereafter, regular charge sheet was served was served to the petitioner on 19.11.2008. The petitioner filed reply and thereafter regular enquiry was ordered. Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fatehabad, was appointed as Enquiry Officer, who submitted his report on 26.5.2009. Member Secretary, Haryana State Legal Service Authority, issued show cause notice for imposing penalty to the petitioner on 11.6.2009. The petitioner submitted his reply on 30.6.1009 and thereafter he was dismissed from service on 7.10.2009. The petitioner filed an appeal, which is dismissed on 30.4.2010 and thereafter he has filed the present petition. In the reply filed, it is stated that the petitioner has no cause to invoke the writ jurisdiction of this Court. A proper enquiry was conducted as per the rules applicable under Haryana Civll Service and Punishment Appeal Rules, 1987. A Judicial Officer has conducted an enquiry, giving him fair opportunity to defend. Even before passing the dismissal order, the petitioner was afforded personal hearing. His appeal was heard by the Administrative Judge CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.12489 OF 2010 :{ 3 }: and dismissed by passing a speaking order. It is highlighted that the charge against the petitioner is for demanding illegal gratification from a practicing Advocate for passing his professional fee bill. It is stated that this misconduct would fall in the category of gravest act of misconduct and so appropriate deserving punishment has been rightly imposed on the petitioner. Prayer accordingly is made to dismiss the writ petition. The counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been punished only on the basis of the statement made by an Advocate, which can not be taken as a gospel truth. Counsel also contends that the Advocate has resiled from the statement, which fact is not substantiated from the record. Merely because the Advocate has given a different date of demand of illegal gratification, then the one mentioned in the charge, can not be read to mean that the Advocate has resiled from his statement. The petitioner was working as a Clerk and was performing a duty may be even more onerous than the duties expected from a Clerk working on the Judicial duties. The petitioner was working in Haryana State Legal Service Authority, which is meant for the need of needy and to help the poor people. Any violations in such like Institutions have to be viewed with concern. The person with impeccable character would be needed in such like Institutions. The petitioner has not alleged any motive on the part of the Advocate to make any false complaint against him. What interest an Advocate would have to make such allegations against the petitioner, can really not be appreciated. The submission made by counsel for the petitioner that the statement of CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.12489 OF 2010 :{ 4 }: the Advocate can not be taken as a gospel truth would equally apply to the petitioner and it can not be assumed that whatever he states is a truth. The Advocates, who are meant to assist the Courts and, thus, are trained and known to be fair in dealing with the proceedings in Courts. Advocates are expected to maintain ethics, which majority of them do maintain. There is no material either placed or urged, which can cast doubt on the statement given by the Advocate- complainant. Moreover, this is not a valid ground for this Court to interfere in the award of punishment, which is imposed after following due process and after giving fair and adequate opportunity to the petitioner to defend himself during the course of enquiry and at the subsequent stages. The writ Court can not appreciate facts and come to any different conclusion. It is not a case of no evidence to term the finding recorded to be perverse. No such plea was either raised before the Appellate Authority or during the course of other proceedings. There is no valid ground to interfere in the impugned order, which is just, fair and proper. The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed. May 10,2011 (RANJIT SINGH ) khurmi JUDGE