MOHAMMAD ABBAS Vs. SETTLEMENT OFFICER, CONSOLIDATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner who was working as Chakbandi Lekhpal has approached this Court under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the order of dismissal from service passed by Settlement Officer of Consolidation, Gonda on 3.7:1991. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner who was suspended with respect to certain charges of making false entries in the revenue records and making such interpolations so as to give advantage to private persons, was served with a charge-sheet containing number of charges.

(2.) The petitioner was required to submit his reply which he did by means of reply dated 16.3.1991 against the charge-sheet dated 3.1.1991. It appears that the petitioner in his reply did not mention that he wants to examine any witness or to cross examine any witness, which may be produced before the Inquiry Officer by the department. The report of Inquiry Officer has been brought on record by the State along with counter-affidavit.

(3.) A perusal of enquiry report would indicate that the Inquiry Officer has proceeded with the enquiry after observing that since the petitioner did not ask for any witness to be produced and also to cross examine any witness and, therefore, it would be presumed that the petitioner does not want to give any evidence in support of his claim. It has further been mentioned in the enquiry report that certain list of documents was asked for from the petitioner but he did not supply as desired. The Inquiry Officer thereafter proceeded to hold the enquiry unilaterally. From the enquiry report it is also evident that the Inquiry Officer has relied upon various documents and revenue records and other material in support of the allegations made in the chargesheet.