MAYUR JAYANTILAL PARIKH Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed for seeking following reliefs:-

(2.) The facts of the case are that the present petitioner was the Principal District Judge at Junagadh and while he worked there from 2011-2012, the petitioner was attributed with as many as 5 charges. On 24.12.2012, the petitioner was served with the memorandum with Annexure-I in the form of charge-sheet under the provisions of the Gujarat Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1971. In brief, the said charges are reproduced herein-below:-

(3.) These charges were for a period commencing from 19.2.2011 to 25.7.2012. According to the petitioner, these charges have been leveled on the basis of the anonymous and pseudonymous complaints, which otherwise could not have been processed. However, an inquiry was conducted by the Inquiry Officer, who happened to be the Principal District Judge, Junagadh, the report for which was submitted on 4.8.2016. The inquiry was numbered as Departmental Inquiry No.6 of 2012. The findings of the inquiry report indicate that charge No.1 is held to be fully proved, charge Nos.2,4 and 5 are held to be partially proved and charge No.3 is held to be not proved. This inquiry report was placed before the Standing Committee of the High Court. After considering the said inquiry report and the material, the Standing Committee prima facie while agreeing with the findings regarding Charge Nos.1, 2 and 3 of the Inquiry Officer, was of the tentative opinion that the findings recorded in respect of charge Nos.4 and 5 cannot be accepted. As a result of this, on 9.12.2016, a show cause notice was given to the petitioner, being delinquent, calling upon him to explain as to why action should not be finalized. The said inquiry notice reflecting on page 50 was served along with the inquiry report, in which the petitioner was called upon in this manner :-