T VISHWANATH Vs. MANAGING DIRECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has called into question the notice, dated 16.03.12015 (Annexure-A) proposing to hold the departmental enquiry.

(2.) Sri V.R.Sachin, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this Court, by its judgment, dated 12.08.2013 (Annexure--B) passed in Criminal Appeal No.2764/2010 has already acquitted the petitioner of all the charges. He submits that there is no proof to show that the petitioner ever fabricated the records and diverted Rs.24,726/-. He submits that the de-facto complainant Sri Kallappa Ramappa Sangolli was mislead into filing a false complaint against the petitioner. He submits that what is alleged to have taken place in 2006 is ordered to be enquired into now. He submits that the petitioner was reinstated into the services of the respondent in January 2013. When the petitioner is due for promotion, the impugned notice is issued only with a view to deny the promotion to the petitioner.

(3.) In support of his submissions, he relies on the judgment of the Rajasthan High Court in the case of SATYA DEV SHARMA vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS, 1994 1 WLN(Raj) 48.