Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Bhai Baldev Singh vs Sgpc on 27 November, 2013

Bench: Surya Kant, Surinder Gupta

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                    AT CHANDIGARH

                                                             LPA NO.274 OF 2013
                                                    DATE OF DECISION : 27.11.2013

Bhai Baldev Singh
                                                                                .... Appellant

                                              Versus

SGPC, Amritsar & others
                                                                           .... Respondents

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT
        HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA

                                               ****
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
                                               ****

Present :        Mr. Mrigank Sharma, Advocate for appellant.

                 Mr. S.S. Mattewal, Advocate for the respondents.

                                              ****
SURYA KANT, J. (ORAL)

The letter patent appeal is directed against the order dated 17.12.2012 passed by learned Single Judge, dismissing the appellant's writ petition in limine.

The appellant having served as Tabla Player in the services of Shiromani Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee, Amritsar for 18 years or so, has been removed from service on the basis of serious allegations of moral turpitude.

Two questions do arise for consideration:

(i) Whether the disciplinary proceedings have been conducted against the appellant in accordance with principles of natural justice and fair play ? -2- LPA No.274 of 2013
(ii) Whether the version of Bibi Manjeet Kaur, contained in her alleged affidavit, has been rightly appreciated ?

Mr. S. S. Mattewal, learned counsel for the respondents though refutes the appellant's claim and urges that the inquiry was held after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the appellant and seeks time to file the written statement.

We are of the considered view that for an effective answer to both the above formulated questions, the records of inquiry may also be required to be perused. It would thus be appropriate to remand the case to the learned Single Judge for fresh adjudication. Consequently, the appeal is allowed in part; the order passed by the learned Single Judge is set aside and the writ petition is remanded to learned Single Judge for fresh adjudication, in accordance with law. The respondents shall be at liberty to file written statement before the learned Single Judge. The parties are directed to appear before the learned Single Judge on 20.01.2014.





                                                                              (SURYA KANT)
                                                                                 JUDGE



                     27th November, 2013                                   (SURINDER GUPTA)
                               'raj'                                            JUDGE




Raj Kumar
2013.12.12 16:15
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
Chandigarh