BHIKHUDAN A GADHAVI Vs. DISTRICT PANCHAYAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By filing instant petition under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed to issue a writ of certiorari, or a writ of mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to quash order dated November/ 1/12/1987, passed by the Deputy District Development Officer (Revenue), Panchmahals at Godhra, by which punishment of removal from service has been imposed on him under Rule 5 of the Gujarat Panchayat Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1964. The petitioner has further prayed to set aside order dated 15/03/1988, passed by the District Development Officer, Panchmahals at Godhra, in Appeal No. 5/87 by which the appeal filed by him against the order of removal from service was dismissed. The petitioner has also prayed to set aside judgment dated June 10, 1988, rendered by the Gujarat Civil Services Tribunal, in Appeal No. 138 of 1988 by which the order of removal from service passed by the Deputy District Development Officer (Revenue), Panchmahals at Godhra as confirmed by the District Development Officer, Panchmahals at Godhra, has been upheld.

(2.) The petitioner is working as a Junior Clerk in the Primary Health Centre of village Mora, Taluka : Godhra, District : Panchmahals. His marriage as per the hindu rites had taken place in the year 1975 with Smt.Manjulaben Fatesinh Gadhvi of village Dahej, District : Bharuch. The petitioner had come in contact with Ms.Haribalaben Jivabhai Gohil of Godhra. An anonymous letter dated 2/04/1986 was addressed to (i) Collector, Panchmahals, (ii) District Development Officer, Godhra, (iii) D.I.G. Baroda Range etc., mentioning that the petitioner, who was a married person and father of two children, had enticed Mr. Haribalaben J.Gohil, and had begotten a child through her. In the said application it was suggested that the matter should be investigated and the petitioner should be brought to book. The Police Sub Inspector of Mora village had conducted an inquiry. He had recorded statements of the petitioner, Ms.Haribalaben, father of the petitioner and the mother of Ms.Haribalaben. In his statement before the police it was maintained by the petitioner that he was married and had two children, but Ms.Haribalalben Gohil was residing with him and had a child through him and that he was maintaining relations with her as husband and wife with the consent of his previous wife Manjulaben. Ms.Haribalaben had also stated in her statement before the police officer that she had contracted love marriage with the petitioner and that she was staying with the petitioner as his wife.

(3.) On 27/06/1986, the statements recorded by the Police Sub Inspector were forwarded by the District Superintendent of Police, Godhra to the District Development Officer, Panchmahals, for necessary action. On perusal of the papers, the District Development Officer, Panchmahals, was satisfied that the petitioner, who was a panchayat servant, had committed breach of Rule 21 of the Gujarat Panchayat Service (Conduct) Rules, 1964 by contracting another marriage with Ms.Haribalalben, and that this was a fit case for initiating a departmental inquiry against him. Accordingly, a charge dated August 4, 1986 was framed against the petitioner mentioning that by contracting second marriage with Ms.Haribalaben, the petitioner had committed breach of Rule 21 of the Gujarat Panchayat Service (Conduct) Rules, 1964, for which the petitioner was liable to be visited with penalty. The statement of imputation and other relevant materials were supplied to the petitioner. By an order dated October 6, 1986, the Deputy District Development Officer, who is the disciplinary authority, had appointed Chitnis, Jilla Panchayat as inquiry officer. The inquiry officer had recorded statements of (i) the petitioner, (ii) Manjulaben etc. In his statement before the inquiry officer, the petitioner had stated that he was living with Ms. Haribalaben as a friend and that he had not contracted any marriage with her. On appreciation of evidence adduced before him, the inquiry officer concluded that the second marriage of the petitioner with Ms. Haribalaben was not proved, but moral turpitude and licentious behaviour on the part of the petitioner were proved. The inquiry officer submitted his report dated May 14/27, 1987 to the disciplinary authority. On perusal of the papers, the disciplinary authority was of the view that the misconduct on the part of the petitioner in having extra-marital relations with another woman was serious one and, therefore, a notice dated June 11, 1987 was issued to the petitioner calling upon him to show cause as to why he should not be removed from service. On receipt of notice, the petitioner had submitted his reply dated 3/09/1987. As the reply of the petitioner was not found to be satisfactory, the disciplinary authority had forwarded all the relavant papers to the Selection Committee for consultation as required by Rule 7(2) of the Gujarat Panchayat Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules along with forwarding letter dated 30/09/1987. The Selection Committee had, after perusal of papers, advised the disciplinary authority vide letter dated 11/11/1987 to remove the petitioner from service. After reviewing the matter, the disciplinary authority was of the confirmed opinion that moral turpitude and wantonness proved on the part of the petitioner were serious and his conduct was unbecoming of a panchayat servant. The disciplinary authority, therefore, by an order dated November/December 1, 1987 removed the petitioner from service. The said order is produced by the petitioner at Annexure-B to the petition.