ASHOKKUMAR DUDHABHAI DABHI Vs. DHOLKA NAGAR PALIKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned advocate Mr.M.B.Gandhi on behalf of the petitioner and learned advocate Mr.D.D.Vaidhya for the respondent Nagarpalika.

(2.) In the present petition, the petitioner has challenged the order which is produced at page.61 of the petition, dated 16th November, 1999 whereby the respondent Dholka Nagarpalika has dismissed the petitioner from service on the basis of the chargesheet dated 7th August, 1999.

(3.) Learned advocate Mr.Gandhi appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that on 18th May, 1999, one Yadi has been sent to the petitioner wherein certain allegation has been made against the petitioner by the Nagarpalika. Learned advocate Mr.Gandhi has also pointed out that on 18th May, 1999 one criminal complaint has been filed by the petitioner against one Shri Natubhai M. Rawal - Overseer under Section 504, 506 [2] and 323 of the Atrocity Act on 7th May, 1999, chargesheet has been served on the petitioner by the Administrator. Thereafter, reply was submitted by the petitioner against the said chargesheet wherein none of the allegation has been admitted by the petitioner. On the contrary, each charge has been denied by the petitioner with clear explanation and defence. Thereafter, on 27th / 28th October, 1999, Administrator has accepted the inquiry report which was submitted by the inquiry Officer dated 27th October, 1999 and show cause notice has been issued to the petitioner against the said report informing that if the delinquent petitioner herein wants to make submit an explanation against the said report, the same be submitted. That on 27th October, 1999 report was submitted by the Inquiry Officer to the Administrator. Learned advocate Mr.Gandhi has submitted that from perusal of the entire report, for proving the charge against the petitioner as levelled against the petitioner on 7th August, 1999, no one was examined on behalf of the Nagarpalika for proving the charge against the petitioner. Even no other witness has been examined in departmental inquiry to prove the charge against the petitioner. Even the petitioner was also not examined in departmental inquiry but at that occasion, he simply stated that whatever reply given by him against the chargesheet, the same may be considered by the authority. The entire report has been submitted by the inquiry officer on the basis of the documents without being proved in the departmental inquiry by leading proper evidence in presence of the petitioner. Thereafter, objection has been raised by the petitioner that there was no proper inquiry initiated and conducted against the petitioner and no reasonable opportunity was given by the respondent and therefore, the entire inquiry and finding thereof, is vitiated, by reply dated 1st November, 1999. Ultimately, punishment order has been passed by the Administrator, Dholka Nagarpalika.