DBCWP 6840/08 (1) In the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan At Jaipur Bench, Jaipur O R D E R In D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6840/2008 Kailash Chand Meena Vs. The Comptroller & Auditor General of India and others Date Of Order :: 15th July, 2009 P R E S E N T HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK PARIHAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. GOYAL Mr. Prahlad Singh, for petitioner. Mr. Gaurav Jain, for respondent. *** Heard learned counsel for the parties. A show cause notice was issued to the petitioner proposing a penalty of dismissal on the ground of conviction by the trial court. The show cause notice dated 27/12/2005 was infact dispatched on 2/1/2006 and as has come on record it was received by the petitioner after 2/2/2006. However, before petitioner could submit reply to the show cause notice, the order of dismissal on the ground of conviction had been passed by the disciplinary authority on 10/2/2006. The original application challenging the order of dismissal filed by the petitioner before the Central Administrative Tribunal has been dismissed by the Tribunal vide order dated 14/3/2007 mainly on the ground that petitioner failed to submit his reply to the show cause notice within 15 days from the date of receipt of the show cause notice and looking to the gravity of the charges levelled against the petitioner the punishment of dismissal was justified. DBCWP 6840/08 (2) The order dated 14/3/2007 passed by the Tribunal is under challenge in the present writ petition. After hearing counsel for the parties, we have carefully gone through the record. Admittedly as has also been noticed by the Tribunal that the conviction of the petitioner had already been stayed by the High Court on 3/2/2006 itself. The dismissal order has been passed only on the ground of conviction and no independent inquiry whatsoever was held by the department before passing the dismissal order. After the conviction having been stayed by the High Court, prima facie the disciplinary authority was not justified in passing the impugned order only on the ground of conviction. Without making any further observation on merits, in our opinion since proper consideration have not been made by the Tribunal, the impugned order dated 14/3/2007 cannot be sustained. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 14/3/2007 passed by the Tribunal is set aside. The matter is remanded back to the Tribunal to decide the original application filed by the petitioner afresh on merits after giving proper opportunity of hearing to both sides. Since both the parties are duly represented through their counsel, they may now appear before the Tribunal on 3/8/2009 to take a date for further proceedings. (J.R. Goyal),J (Ashok Parihar),J VS Shekhawat/- Jr. P.A. D25