C.W.P. No. 10809 of 2007 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No. 10809 of 2007 Date of decision : 16.5.2008. ... EHC Karan Singh ................ Petitioner vs. State of Haryana and others .................Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jasbir Singh Hon'ble Mr. Justice K.C. Puri Present: Sh. S.N. Yadav, Advocate for the petitioner Sh. Harish Rathee, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Haryana. ... Jasbir Singh, J. (Oral) By filing this writ petition, the petitioner prays that writ of certiorari be issued to quash the order dated 23.6.2006 (P-6), vide which punishment of stoppage of two future increments, with cumulative effect, was inflicted upon him. It is apparent from the records that on a complaint, received from the office of District Transport Officer, District Jind, show cause notice was issued to the petitioner. It was allegation against him that on 30.8.2005 he has forcibly taken away Rs.7,000/-, kept in the box of the truck and he asked the truck driver not to disclose it to C.W.P. No. 10809 of 2007 -2- anybody otherwise he would implicate him in a false case. Truck Driver – Gurmit Singh approached the District Transport Officer, Jind, furnished his affidavit, levelling the abovesaid allegation against the petitioner. The District Transport Officer forwarded the complaint to the concerned authority and on that departmental proceedings were initiated against the petitioner. Reply to the show cause notice was found unsatisfactory. Accordingly, the departmental enquiry was instituted, the Enquiry Officer arrived at the conclusion that the petitioner was not guilty. Abovesaid finding was given on the ground that the complainant i.e driver of the truck had turned hostile. However, testimony of the District Transport Officer, who was a responsible officer and who has no axe to grind against the petitioner, was ignored. Taking note of abovesaid fact, on receipt of the enquiry report, the punishment authority disagreed with the same and a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner to impose major penalty against him. Petitioner filed reply to the same. Thereafter, he was afforded opportunity of personal hearing also and then order under challenge was passed. Hence this writ petition. In response to notice issued, reply has been filed, wherein it has been stated that by taking note of length of his service, a very lenient treatment has been given to the petitioner, otherwise his guilt was proved on record. Counsel for the parties heard. It is apparent from the record that petitioner was working as a Head Constable. On receipt of a complaint, supported by an affidavit of the complainant, the District Transport Officer concerned, C.W.P. No. 10809 of 2007 -3- forwarded the same to the office of SP Jind. Enquriy was instituted against the petitioner. Complainant turned hostile. It appears that he was won over. The District Transport Officer deposed against the petitioner. He has specifically stated that truck driver had made the complaint and had also submitted his affidavit. When the petitioner was confronted with regard to the allegations, by the District Transport Officer, in his presence, he returned Rs.7,000/- to the truck driver. Petitioner has failed to bring anything on record, to show that the District Transport Officer was inimical to him. The punishing authority, taking note of evidence on record, disagreed with the enquiry report and issued show cause notice to the petitioner for imposition of a major penalty. Thereafter, order Annexure P-6 was passed. Instead of dismissal from service, punishment of stoppage of two increments, with permanent effect, was imposed upon the petitioner. Relevant portion of the order read thus:- “iv) That the entire departmental enquiry file was perused by the undersigned and it was found that the finding report dated 2-5-2006 of the Enquiry Officer was not based on the facts and as such the undersigned did not think it prudent to be agree with the finding report and hence disagreeing with the finding report of the Enquiry Officer the defaulter was served with a show cause notice wherein punishment of dismissal from service was provisionally proposed. The defaulter has responded to the above show cause notice and has raised pleas which have been perused by the C.W.P. No. 10809 of 2007 -4- undersigned. In this departmental enquiry, there were two main PWs viz. Gurmit Singh (Complainant) S/o Mohan Singh, R/o Gurdaspur (Punjab), the driver of the truck No. HR-39/6300 and Sh. Om Parkash, the then DTO, Jind. During the course of regular proceedings, the driver of the truck turned hostile and backed out from his previous statement. The other main star PW was Sh. Om Parkash, the then DTO, Jind, who has stated in his statement dated 20-3-2006 that the defaulter had forcibly taken Rs.7000/- on 30-8-2005 at 4-00 PM kept in the box behind the driver's seat in the said truck and told the truck driver that he (defaulter) would implicate him in a false case, if he (driver) dared to disclose this fact to anyone. Then on 31-9-2006, the driver of the said truck came to him (DTO) and told him that the constable (defaulter) had forcibly taken Rs.7000/- kept in a box behind driver's seat and also submitted an affidavit in this regard. When Sh. Om Parkash, the then DTO enquired about taking Rs.7000/- from the defaulter in the presence of the driver, the defaulter confessed having taken the money and gave it back to the driver in his (DTO) presence. During the course of regular departmental enquiry, the defaulter had cross examined the DTO and the DTO has supported his previous statement. This evidence is sufficient to indict the defaulter. However, to appreciate C.W.P. No. 10809 of 2007 -5- the facts of the instant case better, the defaulter was given personal hearing on 23-6-2006. During the personal hearing the defaulter could not convince the undersigned about his innocence. He has claimed that Sh. Om Parkash, the then DTO, Jind had some personal grudge against him therefore he had falsely implicated him this case. The guilt of the defaulter has been proved. As regards the quantum of punishment, the undersigned is of the view that nothing short of what has been proposed in the show cause notice would meet the ends of justice. But, keeping in view the length of service (about 18 years) put in by the defaulter and his previous service record, I am taking a lenient view and award him a punishment of stoppage of two increments with permanent effect which would meet the ends of justice. Hence, the defaulter is awarded punishment of stoppage of two future increments with permanent effect. The defaulter was placed under suspension on 12-09-2005 and has not been reinstated since then and now he is reinstated in service with immediate effect. As regards period of suspension, the same is treated as on duty by 10% cut on the balance amount of subsistence allowance will be made from the arrears for the period, he remained under suspension.” We are satisfied with the finding given by the punishing authority, in inflicting the punishment upon the petitioner. Even C.W.P. No. 10809 of 2007 -6- before us, counsel for the petitioner has failed to shatter testimony of the District Transport Officer, who has deposed against the petitioner. Otherwise also, it is apparent from the record that after passing of the order Annexure P-6, the petitioner had gone in appeal and thereafter in revision. Both the orders have been placed on record as Annexures P-8 and P-10. The Appellate authority and Revisional authority have concurred with the findings given by the punishing authority. Counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon a Division Bench judgment of this Court in Darshan Singh, ASI vs. The State of Haryana and others 1997 (6) SLR 746, to contend that before issuing show cause notice, reasons for disagreement with the Enquiry Officer, have not been supplied to the petitioner. We feel that this objection has to be rejected, the reasons for disagreement are very apparent from the impugned order passed against the petitioner. In view of facts mentioned above, no case is made out for interference. Dismissed. ( Jasbir Singh ) Judge ( K.C. Puri ) 16.5.2008. Judge chug