95 el Reqular Second Appeal ta 2297 of 201Q lOSMla IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB 8 HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH e e e 1 1 Date of Decision March 20110 1 t Reqular Second ApPeal No297 of 2010 lOaMl 0 C I Radhey Shyam Dwivedi Appellant C I VERSUS Z State of Haryana and others Respondents I CORAM HONBLE MR3USTICE MOHINDER PAL Z 1 Whether Reportersof Local papers may be allowed to see CO the judgment 7 2 To be referred to the Reportersor not7 7 3 Whether the judgmentshould be reportedIrl the Digest2 Z Presentl Mr Sunil Panwar Advocate for the appellant MOHINDER PAL J Appellantplaintiff Radhey Shyam Dwivedi Retired Circle AgricultureOfficer lereinafter referredto as the appellanJ iS In second appeal aggrieved against the judgment and decree passed by the first AppellateCourt wherebythe judgment and decree passed by the trial Court was set aside and the suit filedby Gupta Suruchi 2012.11.16 15: 50 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 96 4 2 Reqular Second Appeal No297 of 2010 108M10 the plaintifffor damagesand compensation was dismissed The appellant was working as Circle AgricltureOfficer under the Director of Agriculture Haryana Chandigarh defendantrespondentNo3J He was suspended by the orders m dated 17111995 issued by the Director of Agriculture Haryana tr defendanterespondentNo21 The claim of the appellantwas that 0 0 the said order of suspensionwas passed by respondent Noe2 I 0 under the influence of respondentNo and by the passingof I the said order prestigeand honour of the appellanthad been Z Iowered in the eyes of his colleaguesand superiors This prompted the appellantto file the instant suit for recovery of Rs500001 as damagesand compensation from the respondents I Though the trial Court decreed the suit of the Z appellant therebypassing a decree for recovery of Rs500001 Qo as damages and compensationalong with interest at the rate 7 of 12 per cent per annum from the date of institution of the suit Z till the recovery and the amount was heid to be recoverable from respondentNo but the Iower AppellateCourt reversed the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court For reachingthis conclusion the Iower appellateCourt was influenced by the fact that the appellant had failed to prove that the allegations made against him were not only false but defamatoryin nature and were made with a malice which were the ingredients of proving such a charge against a public servant The allegationof the appellant was that respondent No had misbehaved with him in the meeting held on Gupta Suruchi 2012.11.16 15: 50 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 97 V 8 Reciular Second Appeal No297 of 2010 l08M1 20 101995 In order to prove his allegation the appellant had examined Braham Pal PW2 List of the persons whO were present Ill the meeting held on 20101995 is on record as Exhibit PW13 However in the said Iist the name of Braham Pal 1 IAl2I IS not mentioned Under the circumstances it was held by the Iower appellateCourt that In the absence of any 0 0 corroboration statement of appellant Radhey ShyamDwivedi I C5 PW7 was not sufficient to prove his claim that respondent I No had misbehaved with the appeilant Irl the rneetingheld on Z 2010 1995 Besides an InquiryOftlcer was appointed in this case to go into the details of the matter who did not hold that the l allegations of the appellant were correct The main thrust of the I appellant was that in the Ietter Exhibit PW1111 written by Z respondent No on the basis of which he was placed under m suspension fa Ise alIegationshad been Ievelled against him by respondent No and thereby prestige of the a ppellant had n7 Z Iowered in the eyes of his colleaguesand seniors Before writing Qu Ietter Exhibit PsW1111 respondentNo had sought explanation of the appellant qua misbehaviour vide his Ietter dated 25 10 1995 and it was made clear in the said Ietter that if no explanationwas received it would be presumed that the a ppellant did not wantto say anythingin this regard and the case would be referred to the Director of Agriculture However no reply was submitted by the appellant to the Ietter dated 25101995 wherebyexplanationof the appellant was sought It has also come on record that the appellantwas not placed under suspension Gupta Suruchi 2012.11.16 15: 50 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 98 1 4 Reclular Second Appeal No 2297 of 2010 lOSMI only on the basis of Ietter Exhibit PW1111 but there were otherthree charges against him and the meetingwas held on 20101995 on the request of the appeilant to drop those charges againsthim On inquiry those chargeswere found to have Ibeen 1 proved Underthese circumstances it cannot be said that the r appellant had been placed under suspensionon false grounds No 0 U fault therefore can be found with the findings recorded by I C5 the the Iower appellateCourt Ieadingto the reversal of the I judgment and decree passedby the trial Court and dismissal of Z the suit filed by the appellant In view of the above I do not find any patent illegality tr or irregularity lll the findings of fact recorded by the first I AppellateCourt which may give rise to any substantial questionof Z Iaw in the present appeal m Hence the present appealis dismissed V2 Z C MOHINDER PAL I Il 20110 JUDGE 1 ak rt 1 317 1 SaIl 1 Gupta Suruchi 2012.11.16 15: 50 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document