Uttarakhand High Court
Dinesh Rana vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others on 7 September, 2018
Bench: Rajiv Sharma, Manoj Kumar Tiwari
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
AT NAINITAL
WRIT PETITION (S/B) NO. 19 OF 2018
Dinesh Rana ..........Petitioner
Vs.
State of Uttarakhand and others. ........Respondents
Mr. Piyush Garg, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. B.P.S. Mer, Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand.
JUDGMENT
Coram: Hon'ble Rajiv Sharma, ACJ.
Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.
Dated: 7th September, 2018 Rajiv Sharma, ACJ (Oral) Disciplinary proceedings were commenced against the petitioner. Inquiry Officer was appointed. A charge was leveled against the petitioner that the accused, namely, Ajay Pal has escaped from the custody of the petitioner. Inquiry Officer submitted his report to the Disciplinary Authority. A notice was given to the petitioner on 03.10.2013. Petitioner filed his reply on 30.10.2013.
2. The Disciplinary Authority, without taking into consideration the reply filed by the petitioner on 30.10.2013, has imposed penalty of censure upon the petitioner on 08.11.2013.
3. Once the notice was served upon the petitioner and the petitioner filed his reply, the contents of the same should have been taken into consideration by the 2 Disciplinary Authority. The purpose of issuing a show cause is to enable the delinquent to project his case before the Authority and to explain his conduct.
4. Petitioner had also filed an Appeal, which was rejected on 24th October, 2015. Petitioner had also faced criminal case under Sections 217 and 223 of the Indian Penal Code, and he was honorably acquitted on 17.02.2017.
5. Petitioner has also challenged the impugned orders by way of Claim Petition No. 24/SB/2016. It was rejected by the learned Tribunal on 28th August, 2017.
6. There is violation of principles of natural justice since the reply given by the petitioner on 30th October, 2018 has not been considered.
7. The appellate order dated 24th October, 2015 will not come in the way of the petitioner since there is violation of principles of natural justice at the initial stage.
8. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. Impugned order dated 08.11.2013 (Annexure 4 to the writ petition), order dated 24.10.2015 (Annexure-5 to the writ petition) and order dated 28.08.2017 (Annexure -7 to the writ petition) are quashed and set aside.
(Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) (Rajiv Sharma, ACJ.) 07.09.2018 Rathour