ASHOK KUMAR KAHAR Vs. MPSEB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was appointed as Testing Assistant Grade-II in the year 1978. He was promoted to the post of Testing Assistant Grade I in the year 1994. While he was continuing in the said post he was arrested on 12-3-2001 and remained in custody till 10-1-2002 in respect of two criminal cases. The criminal case was founded on the allegation when one Mr. Bhargav, after withdrawing the amount of Rs. 61,000/- from M. P. Rajya Sahakari Maryadit Bank, Jabalpur was proceeding to Nayagaon, three persons came on motorcycle and snatched away the bag in which he was carrying the amount. On an FIR being lodged, investigation was carried out and the petitioner was arrayed as an accused in respect of an offence punishable under Section 392 of IPC. It is also borne out of material on record a case under Section 394 of IPC was initiated against the petitioner.

(2.) DURING the pendency of the criminal case a departmental proceeding was initiated against the petitioner in respect of two charges. The petitioner submitted his reply on 5-6-2001 vide Annexure P-3 and demanded certain documents which were mentioned in the list of documents attached to the charge-sheet. The documents were supplied to him as per memorandum dated 20-4-2004. Thereafter the petitioner vide letter dated 27-4-2004, annexure P-5 was asked to submit information regarding the criminal cases initiated against him. It is averred that on the same date one G. P. Jaiswal, E. E. , mpseb was appointed as Inquiry Officer and one Mr. Dhirendra Singh, Asstt. Engineer was appointed as Presenting Officer. The petitioner vide letter dated 8-5-2004 submitted the information regarding the status of the criminal cases instituted against him. The petitioner also informed that one case has already been decided resulting in his acquittal and in other two cases which are the subject matter of Criminal Case Nos. 50/2001 and 1005/2001 prosecution witnesses have already been examined and cross-examined and they are at verge of decision.

(3.) ACCORDING to the writ petitioner, despite the aforesaid information given by him on 1-11-2004 vide Annexure P-8 he was informed to attend the departmental enquiry on 18-11-04. He attended the enquiry and requested for assistance of defence representative to defend him in the departmental inquiry. On the basis of the said prayer, inquiry was adjourned to 7-12-2004 and the petitioner was required to submit the name of the representative. On 3-12-04 vide Annexure P-10 the petitioner entered into correspondence with the respondent No. 2 stating that two criminal cases pending against him were in the verge of decision and hence, the department would be well advised to await for the verdict in the criminal cases before proceeding further in the departmental inquiry. It is contended that in the departmental inquiry two charges were levelled against him and the said charges were identical in nature in respect of which the criminal cases were pending. It is urged that the charges in the departmental inquiry are identical and based on same set of facts and evidence would be required to be adduced and hence, it should be kept in abeyance till the criminal cases are decided. Despite the aforesaid request the inquiry was not stayed.