High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh
Case Law Search
S.K.Anand v. The Punjab State Co-operative Supply Mar - RSA-2310-2005  RD-P&H 1261 (28 February 2006)
Case No. : R.S.A.No.2310 of 2005
Date of Decision : March 03, 2006.
S.K.Anand .... Appellant
The Punjab State Co-operative
Supply Marketing Federation Ltd. .... Respondent Coram : Hon'ble Mr.Justice Viney Mittal.
* * *
Present : Mr.Vipin Mahajan, Advocate
for the appellant.
Ms.Geeta Sharma, Advocate
for respondent no.1.
JUDGMENT (Oral) :
The plaintiff has lost in the two courts below in his claim for declaration that the order dated February 19, 1991, whereby an order of punishment had been passed against the plaintiff, reducing him to the minimum of time scale, with cumulative effect and that the embezzled amount was to be recovered in 24 instalments from the plaintiff, was illegal, bad and not binding upon him. The plaintiff additionally claimed that initially, an order of punishment of his dismissal from service had been passed but the appellate authority, in a departmental appeal, has reduced the punishment and therefore, the period of dismissal to re-instatement was treated as dies-non, which was illegal, null and void.
Both the courts below have concurrently held that the plaintiff had been charge-sheeted and a regular departmental inquiry was held against him. The charges levelled against him were duly proved. As a result of R.S.A.No.2310 of 2005 : 2 :
report of the Inquiry Officer, the punishing authority passed an order of punishment, dismissing the plaintiff from service. However, on an appeal filed by him, the appellate authority reduced the punishment and it was ordered that the plaintiff be placed in the minimum of time scale, with cumulative effect. Further, the embezzled amount was ordered to be recovered from him in 24 instalments. The two courts below have also held that the inquiry proceedings had been conducted in accordance with law and by adhering to the principles of natural justice.
It is well settled that civil court can not sit in appeal over and above the order of punishment passed by the competent authority. It is further clear from the record that the plaintiff has already been dealt with very leniently.
Shri Vipin Mahajan, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, has argued that a preliminary inquiry was conducted against the plaintiff but the report of the aforesaid inquiry had not been supplied to him. It has also been argued by him that the officer, who had conducted the departmental inquiry, was produced as a witness, during the regular inquiry proceedings. In these circumstances, learned counsel argues that the regular inquiry proceedings were vitiated.
I do not find any merit in the aforesaid contention of the learned counsel. A preliminary inquiry is in the nature of a fact finding inquiry and the said inquiry has not been made the basis of the report in regular inquiry.
A copy of the said preliminary inquiry report was not required to be supplied to the plaintiff. The charges against the plaintiff have been independently proved.
Nothing has been shown that the findings recorded by both the courts below suffer from any infirmity or are contrary to the record.
No question of law, much less any substantial question of law, arises in the present appeal.
March 03, 2006 ( VINEY MITTAL )
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.