R.S. PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this petition under Article226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has, interalia, prayed that the impugned order of penalty dated 24.10.2001, passed against the petitioner be quashed and set aside. It is further prayed that the Chargesheet dated 11.11.1997 and the reasons for disagreement by the Disciplinary Authority, as communicated to the petitioner vide letter dated 09.02.2001, also be quashed and set aside.

(2.) The petitioner was initially appointed as Mamlatdar, through direct recruitment, on 16.05.1977. He was promoted as Deputy Collector in January, 1983, and was appointed in the cadre of Additional Collector in February, 1994. At the time when the petition was filed, the petitioner was holding the post of Director, District Rural Development Agency at Junagadh. During the pendency of the petition, the petitioner has retired from service upon attaining the age of superannuation on 28.02.2013.

(3.) During the period from 26.05.1993 to 09.05.1994, the petitioner was posted as Resident Deputy CollectorcumPrant Officer at Gandhinagar. As the post of Deputy Collector (Land Reforms) (Appeal), Gandhinagar, was vacant, the petitioner was given the additional charge of the said post for the period from 01.07.1993 to 27.08.1993. A chargesheet was issued to the petitioner on 11.11.1997, for alleged irregularities in his working, while holding the additional charge of the post of Deputy Collector (Land Reforms) (Appeal) for the period from 01.07.1993 to 27.08.1993. The petitioner submitted his defence statement on 31.08.1998. Vide order dated 24.09.1999, the State Government appointed an Inquiry Officer. The petitioner appeared before the Inquiry Officer and rendered his detailed explanation against the charge levelled against him. The Inquiry Officer prepared a detailed Report dated 01.07.2000, arriving at the conclusion that the charge was not proved. The State Government, being the Disciplinary Authority, did not agree with the findings of the Inquiry Officer and issued reasons for disagreement vide communication dated 09.02.2001, addressed to the petitioner. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner submitted a detailed representation on 12.03.2001. The Disciplinary Authority imposed the penalty of withholding one increment for a period of four years with future effect, vide the impugned order dated 24.10.2001. It is further stated in the said order that during the said period of four years, the petitioner would not earn any increment. Aggrieved by the abovestated order, the petitioner is before this Court.