S K GOEL Vs. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WHILE the petitioner was working as Assistant Excise Commissioner in the office of the Excise Commissioner at Dehradun, he was placed under suspension pending disciplinary proceedings as per Annexure 1 order dated 15 -07 -2004. According to Annexure 1 order, the contemplated disciplinary action was in respect of alleged irregularities committed by the petitioner when he was working as' District Excise Officer at Haridwar. Challenging Annexure 1 order of suspension, the petitioner filed this writ petition and by Interim order dated 19 -07 -2004, operation of the suspension order dated 15 -07 -2004 was stayed by this Court. Against the interim order dated 19 -07 -2004, the State of Uttaranchal filed Civil Appeal No. 1494 of 2005 in the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the said Appeal was disposed of by the Supreme Court on 28 -02 -2005 setting aside the interim order passed by the High Court and directing the High Court to dispose of the writ petition as expeditiously as possible and in any event within a period of three months. Consequent upon the said order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the petitioner was again placed under suspension by an' order dated 23/25 -10 -2004. Thus, the petitioner continues to be under suspension pending disciplinary action against him.

(2.) THE representation of the petitioner regarding the change of option for the Uttaranchal State had been rejected by the Government of U.P. on 28 -07 -2002. In the order dated 17 -05 -2004 by which final allocation of Assistant Excise Commissioners to the State of Uttaranchal has been made, the name of the petitioner was not included. Consequently, the petitioner is liable to be treated as allocated to the State of U.P. Hence, by order dated 26 -02 -2005 of the Government of Uttaranchal and consequential order dated 02 -03 -2005 of the Excise Commissioner, Uttaranchal, the petitioner was relieved from the State of Uttaranchal and was directed to report to the Government of U.P. Challenging the said orders, the petitioner filed writ Petition No. 38 of 2005 (S/ B) before this Court and by the Interim order dated 19 -03 -2005, this Court stayed the relieving order dated 02 -03 -2005 till the disposal of the writ petition. Thus, on the strength of interim order passed in Writ Petition No. 38 of 2005 (S/B), the petitioner continues to be in service of the State of Uttaranchal. Whether or not the petitioner is liable to be allocated to the State Uttaranchal is an Issue to be decided in the Writ Petition No. 38 of 2005. Till the issue is finally decided in that writ petition, the petitioner is entitled to be treated as continuing in the service of the State of Uttaranchal.

(3.) IT cannot be disputed that the Government, being the Appointing Authority, was competent to suspend the petitioner pending disciplinary action. It is also seen that the disciplinary action was initiated against the petitioner on the basis of a preliminary enquiry conducted in respect of certain irregularities alleged to have been committed by him while he was working as District Excise Officer, Haridwar. The petitioner has got a contention that no disciplinary action can be taken against him on the basis of the said enquiry report as the said report was rejected by the Supreme Court in some other proceedings. It is an objection that can be taken by the petitioner in the disciplinary proceedings itself. Hence, we refrain from expressing any opinion on the above contention. The disciplinary authority shall consider such an objection, if raised before it.