LAWS(MPH)-2002-8-104

STATE OF M.P. Vs. SHEETAL KUMAR SANDI

Decided On August 12, 2002
STATE OF M.P. Appellant
V/S
Sheetal Kumar Sandi Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, filed by the petitioners -The State of Madhya Pradesh and the Dean, M.G.M. Medical College, Indore - is directed against the order dated 31.1.2000. passed by the Indore Bench of M.P. State Administrative Tribunal, (for short, 'the SAT') quashing the order of removal of respondent No.1 Dr. Sheetal Kumar Bandi, passed by the State Government on 28.9.1999.

(2.) RESPONDENT Dr. Bandi, on the date of his removal, was working on the post of Professor, Surgery (Paediatrics) in M.G.M. Medical College, Indore, a Government institution. He, amongst others, was prosecuted on the charge under section 337 of the Indian Penal Code, for being negligent in performing operation on a two year old healthy child mistaking him for another child who was to be operated upon for Hernia. After trial, he was convicted by the Magistrate for the said charge and sentenced to six months rigorous imprisonment with fine Rs. 500/ -. On appeal, the conviction was affirmed but the sentence of imprisonment was set aside, leaving the sentence of fine unaltered, by Additional Sessions Judge, Indore, vide his judgment dated 10.5.1999 in Criminal Appeal No. 175/1998. Following this conviction and taking recourse to rule 19 of the M.P. Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1966 (for short, 'the State Rules') and after consulting the State Public Service Commission, the State Government, on 28.9.1999, imposed major penalty of removal on the respondent. The respondent challenged his removal before the SAT by filing an application (O.A. No. 1611/1999) which has been allowed and the impugned removal has been quashed with all consequential benefits to the respondent, vide order dated 31.1.2000 which is under challenge before this Court.

(3.) WE have heard Shri Z.A. Khan, learned Additional Advocate General for the petitioner State and Shri Amit Agrawal, learned counsel for the respondent -employee.