D.S.PATEL Vs. STATE OF C.G.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition is against the order dtd. 29/7/2015 (Annexure - P/1) by which the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order dtd. 26/3/2013 (Annexure-P/8) whereby after the departmental enquiry the punishment was imposed upon the petitioner for stoppage of four annual increments with cumulative effect, was dismissed.

(2.) (i) Case of the petitioner is that he was working as Assistant Commissioner, Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribe Development Department and Member Secretary of the Purchase Committee. A work order was issued in favour of M/s Friends, Baikunthpur, for supply of pillow & mattress. Since the code of fiber yarn & coir foam were same instead of coir foam it was mentioned as fiber yarn in the work order. Accordingly, the supplier made the supply of fiber yarn pillow & mattress. When the State at its part found that the coir foam pillow & mattress were not supplied, the supplier was asked to take back the entire material. It is not in dispute that the supplier did not take back the goods instead filed a petition before this Court. In the meanwhile, the correspondence was done vide Annexure - P/4 dtd. 10/5/2006 by the Commissioner, ST & SC Development Department and it was advised to the Collector, Surguja that since the supply has been made, the payment may be released in favour of the supplier. Thereafter, the departmental enquiry was contemplated against the petitioner vide order dtd. 18/1/2007 passed by the Collector, Surguja and one Mr. Vijay Kumar Dhurve, Additional Collector was appointed as Enquiry Officer.

(3.) (a) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that when the consultation was made with the PSC, it has recommended for enhancement of punishment without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Against the punishment order dtd. 26/3/2013, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Hon'ble Governor as per Rule 27 of the Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1966 (for brevity 'the CCA Rules'). He would further submit that in the meanwhile by letter dtd. 20/3/2014 (Annexure-P/10) the Under Secretary sent back the case to the Enquiry Officer for doing the needful. Thereafter, the amended enquiry report dtd. 29/5/2014 was submitted. He would also submit that after the matter was remanded, the petitioner was neither noticed nor any opportunity of hearing was given.