R.S.A. No. 1839 of 2009 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH R.S.A. No. 1839 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision: 01.05.2009 Punjab State Electricity Board, Patiala and another ....appellants versus Er. Bhag Singh ....respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD K. SHARMA Present: - Mr. P.S. Thiara, Advocate, for the appellants. *** VINOD K. SHARMA, J. (ORAL) This regular second appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 12.1.2009 passed by the learned Courts below, vide which the suit filed by the plaintiff/respondent, seeking declaration to challenge, the imposition of minor penalty, stands decreed. The plainitff/respondent brought a suit for declaration to challenge an order, imposing minor punishment of stoppage of one increment, without cummulative effect, on the basis of charges levelled against him. The admitted facts are, that the plainitff/respondent was issued a charge-sheet for imposing major penalty, to which he replied. Instead of proceeding further with the matter on the basis of reply submitted and without giving an opportunity of hearing to the plaintiff/respondent, the appellant/defendant imposed minor penalty of R.S.A. No. 1839 of 2009 (O&M) -2- stoppage of one increment, without cummulative effect. The learned Courts below by way of concurrent finding have held that the penalty imposed could not be sustained in law and, thus, decreed the suit. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants contends, that the appeal raises the follwing substantial question of law: "Whether it was open to the defendant/appellants to impose minor penalty without holding regular inquiry even though the chargesheet was issued for major penalty?" The point raised has been answered against the appellants by the learned Courts below, by placing reliance on the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Dr. K.G. Tiwari Vs. State of Haryana, 2002 (3) RSJ 296, wherein the Full Bench of this Court has been pleased to lay down as under: - "We hold that once the charge sheet is issued under rule 7 of the Rules 1987 for the imposition of a major penalty, which envisages holding of a regular departmental enquiry, the disciplinary authority cannot by merely examining the reply to the charge sheet, inflict even a minor punishment without holding a complete departmental enquiry." In view of the authoritative pronouncement, the substantial question of law raised is answered against the appellant. No merit. Dismissed. (Vinod K. Sharma) Judge May 01, 2009 R.S.