IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CWP No. 3084 of 2009
Date of Decision: 2.3.2009
Jagdish Singh ---Petitioner
Vs.
Punjab & Haryana High Court through Registrar ---Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI.
Present:- Mr. Gourav Bhaiya, Advocate for
the petitioner.
***
PERMOD KOHLI.J (ORAL)
The petitioner has challenged the order dated 15.11.2008
passed by the District & Sessions Judge, Jalandhar appointing the Enquiry
Officer for holding enquiry into the charges against the petitioner for which
the charge sheet already stands served. The grievance of the petitioner is
that the enquiry has been ordered in terms of paragraph 5-b of Rule 8 of
Punjab Civil Services (Punishment & Appeal) Rules, 1970 read with Rule
12 (2) of Punjab Court Establishment Recruitment and general conditions of
service Rules, 1997. According to the petitioner he has filed the reply and
that Rule 5 (b) is not attracted.
I have perused the Rule 8 contained in para 4 of the aforesaid
rules. Rule 5 (b) deals with the case, where no written statement to the
charge sheet is filed, however, Rule 5(a) clearly covers the case of the
petitioner, where the reply to the written statement is filed and the
disciplinary authority has the right to hold enquiry on consideration of the
written statement, if the authority is not satisfied with the reply. In the
CWP No. 3084 of 2009 -2-
impugned order, no reference is made to the reply filed by the petitioner.
In view of the above circumstances, the impugned order is
hereby set aside, however, the disciplinary authority i.e. District & Sessions
Judge, Jalandhar is hereby directed to pass a fresh order keeping in view the
reply submitted by the petitioner in accordance with the provisions of Rule
8 sub Rule 5(a) within a period of four weeks.
Disposed of as such.
(PERMOD KOHLI)
JUDGE
2.3.2009
lucky