T.P. VIRADIYA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this writ application under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner - a dismissed Taluka Development Officer, has prayed for the following reliefs:

(2.) The facts of this case may be summarised as under:

(3.) Mr. Oza, the learned senior advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the State Government committed an error in passing the impugned order dismissing his client from service. He submitted that even if the Inquiry Officer fully exonerates the delinquent, it is always open for the disciplinary authority to disagree with the findings recorded by the Inquiry Officer, but for that purpose, the disciplinary authority is obliged to record his reasons for such disagreement. He would submit that such reasons for disagreement are to be supplied to the delinquent so that he can file an appropriate reply in that regard before the final order is passed.