N P PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both the petitioners were serving at the relevant time as Executive Engineers and after conclusion of the departmental enquiry, both of them were removed from service. The said action is impugned in the present Special Civil Applications. Since the issues involved in both these petitions are common, both these petitions are disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) It is required to be noted that by an order dated 16.11.1992, both the petitioners were removed from the post of Executive Engineer. At the time of admitting these matters, the said removal order was stayed by this Court. Accordingly, both the petitioners are protected by way of interim relief. During the pendency of the Special Civil Applications, the interim relief remained in force till today and, in the meanwhile, both the petitioners have retired on attaining the age of superannuation. So far as Special Civil Application No.1879 of 1994 is concerned, the petitioner has retired by way of superannuation in December, 2000 and so far as the petitioner of Special Civil Application No.1850 of 1994 is concerned, he has retired as back as on 29th February, 1996 and by virtue of the interim relief granted by this Court, they continued in service irrespective of the said removal order.

(3.) The petitioners were subjected to departmental proceedings in connection with irregularities in the matter of drilling of tube wells during the scarcity, which ultimately led to the enquiry. The incident in question had taken place during the period between 1972 and 1973. So far as Special Civil Application No.1879 of 1994 is concerned, the petitioner therein was subjected to charge-sheet, dated 17.1.1980, Annexure `A', page 17. The charge-sheet contained five charges. The aforesaid charge-sheet was issued in connection with the tube well work, which was carried out during 1972-'73. It was alleged that because of the aforesaid irregularity on the part of the petitioner, the Government suffered loss of Rs.6,79.937.00. So far as Special Civil Application No.1850 of 1994 is concerned, the petitioner therein was subjected to charge-sheet dated 15.3.1980, and in the said charge-sheet, three charges were mentioned against him. So far as the charge in connection with classification of the layer of earth regarding soft rock and boulders is concerned, both the petitioners were subjected to the said charge on the ground that the aforesaid classification was not properly made, with the result that the Government was required to pay Rs.6,79,937.00. The said charge was common so far as each of the petitioners herein is concerned. However, so far as petitioner of Special Civil Application No.1879 of 1994 is concerned, the said charge is worded slightly differently in the sense that it is alleged against him that he had not done proper classification of strata, i.e. layers of the land, while so far as the petitioner of Special Civil Application No.1850 of 1994 is concerned, it is stated that even though he was aware that the classification is not proper, still, he permitted the work and payment was made.