DIWAN SINGH Vs. DELHI JAL BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has shown me an order dated 19.3.2007 passed by the Disciplinary Authority. As per this order, the Inquiry Officer has held that the charges against the petitioner have been proved. Nonetheless the disciplinary authority has not imposed any substantive penalty against the petitioner except stating that the ends of justice would be met if 'displeasure of the Government' is conveyed to him. This view has been taken by the disciplinary authority for the reason that the inquiry has taken 13 long years and the Charged Officer, in the meanwhile, has retired from service. The disciplinary authority has also said that during the pendency of the inquiry, the Charged Officer was not given his terminal benefits and therefore he has already suffered sufficiently.

(2.) Having regard to the order dated 19.3.2007, the respondent will now pay to the petitioner his terminal benefits and shall also consider his request for payment of interest on the retiral benefits in case it is so permissible in law. This shall be done within three months.

(3.) With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of. The order dated 19.3.2007 is taken on record. It will be open to the petitioner to challenge the order dated 19.3.2007, if he is so advised.