Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Ashfaq Mohammad vs State Of Raj And Ors on 21 January, 2021
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9555/2016
Ashfaq Mohammad S/o Late Sultan Mohammad, Near Jairaj
Park, Jhalawar, Rajasthan
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan Through Its Additional Chief Secretary,
Department Of Home, Government Of Rajasthan,
Government Secretariat, Jaipur
2. The Director General Of Police, Police Headquarter, Lal
Kothi, Behind Nehru Palace, Jaipur
3. The Inspector General Of Police Headquarter, Police
Headquarter, Lal Kothi, Behind Nehru Palace, Jaipur
4. The Inspector General Of Police, Kota Range, Kota
5. Shri Shiv Lal Joshi, I.p.s., D.i.g. Personnel And At Present
Working As Inspector General Of Polic, Police
Headquarter, Lal Kothi, Nehru Palace, Jaipur, Rajasthan
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Tanveer Ahamad through VC For Respondent(s) : Mr. P.S. Naruka on behalf of Mr. Rupin Kala, G.C. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA Judgment 21/01/2021
1. The petitioner by way of this writ petition assails the punishment awarded by the appellate authority whereby the original punishment awarded to the petitioner vide order dated 31.12.2013 was reduced to stopping of two grade increments without cumulative effect to stopping of one grade increment without cumulative effect by the appellate authority vide his order dated 18.04.2016.
(Downloaded on 22/01/2021 at 10:20:35 PM)
(2 of 3) [CW-9555/2016]
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that once the appellate authority has reached to the conclusion that the submissions of the petitioner as against the charge-sheet was found to be correct, the appellate authority ought to have quashed the punishment order and exonerating the petitioner of the charges. Learned counsel submits that earlier too, the appellate authority had set aside the order passed by the disciplinary authority with two grade increments without cumulative effect and remanded the matter back to the disciplinary authority to first conduct the preliminary enquiry and thereafter pass the punishment order. Learned counsel submits that upon remand, the respondent again reiterated its earlier order and punished the petitioner with two grade increments without cumulative effect.
3. I have considered the submissions and perused the impugned order. So far as the provisions of Rule 17 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeals) Rules, 1958 (hereinafter to be referred as Rules of 1958) are concerned, this Court is satisfied that there is no transgression by the authority and the petitioner was given due opportunity. Further this Court finds that appellate authority which passed the order in review has noticed that there is no new fact which has come on record. In the appeal to show that the punishment order was illegal or unjustified. The only aspect the appellate authority passing order in review noticed was that the punishment awarded did not commensurate with the nature of allegations and, therefore, it decided to reduce the punishment to stopping of two grade increments without cumulative effect to one grade increment without cumulative effect.
(Downloaded on 22/01/2021 at 10:20:35 PM)
(3 of 3) [CW-9555/2016]
4. Thus, the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the plea raised by the petitioner was accepted by the appellate authority is not made out.
5. It is also noticed that the allegations have been found to be proved twice by the disciplinary authority after giving due opportunity of hearing. A preliminary enquiry was also conducted in the matter. In the circumstances, it cannot be said that the punishment was awarded on account of any mala fides. The allegations levelled by the petitioner which were also the matter of an FIR registered by the police against certain persons was also not found to be proved and a final report submitted which has been accepted by the concerned court. Thus, contention of malice was also not found to be proved. Hence, no interference is warranted.
6. The writ petition is devoid of merits and is accordingly dismissed.
(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),J NAVAL KISHOR /Harshit-81 (Downloaded on 22/01/2021 at 10:20:35 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)