CWP No.1161 of 2003 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP NO.1161 OF 2003 DATE OF DECISION: 14-02-2008 Chander Dutt .....PETITIONER VERSUS State of Haryana and others .....RESPONDENTS CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHINDER PAL PRESENT: MrS.K.Verma, Advocate for the petitioner. HEMANT GUPTA, J. Learned counsel for the petitioner has, inter alia, argued that the Inquiry officer was appointed to investigate the charges levelled against the petitioner. He submitted that in report Annexure P1 dated 18-02-2000 given by the Inquiry Officer whereby the petitioner was exonerated from the charges. However, without recording any reasons to dis-agree with the findings recorded by the Inquiry Officer, the Management of the Society passed an order of dismissal of the services of the petitioner with immediate effect in its meeting held on 22-05-2001. The appeal against the said order was allowed by the learned Deputy Registrar on 24-10-2001 vide order Annexure P5. However, the said order has been set aside by the CWP No.1161 of 2003 2 Joint Secretary, Co-Operation Department Haryana exercising the powers of the State Government on 05-07-2002 while passing a non-speaking order only on the ground that the Society has given in writing that proper procedure was adopted by the Managing Committee. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that since the Inquiry Officer has exonerated the petitioner, therefore, the Managing Committee could not take any decision to terminate the services of the petitioner without recording the reasons of dis-agreement and providing an opportunity to the petitioner to submit his representation on the said reasons of dis-agreement. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon AIR 1998 S.C. 2713 Punjab National Bank Vs. Kunj Behari Misra to contend that in the absence of reasons of dis-agreement, the order of punishment is not justified and is illegal. In view of the admitted fact that the reasons of dis-agreement were not recorded and the petitioner was not given any opportunity of hearing on such reasons, we are of the opinion that the resolution Annexure P3 dated 22-05-2001 passed by the Managing Committee and the subsequent order passed by the Secretary exercising the powers of the State Government on 05-07-2002 suffer from patent illegality and cannot be sustained in law. Since the order of punishment of removal has been set aside on account of fact that it is violative of the principles of natural justice, liberty was required to be granted to the respondents to proceed from the stage of illegality i.e. to record reasons of dis-agreement and proceed in accordance with law. But in the present case, the petitioner- employee has died and, therefore, liberty to proceed against the disciplinary proceedings cannot be given as such proceedings stand abated. CWP No.1161 of 2003 3 Consequently, the present writ petition is allowed and orders Annexures P3, P5 and P7 are set aside. Respondents are directed to take consequent action of payment of retiral benefits, if any, in accordance with law. (HEMANT GUPTA) JUDGE ( MOHINDER PAL ) February 14, 2008 JUDGE jt