RAM PRAKASH TRADEMEN Vs. STATE OF MP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGING the order passed by the disciplinary authority dated 17-11-1992 Annexure P/8 imposing penalty of removal from service on the petitioner and consequential orders Annexures A/9 and A/10 passed by the appellate Authority dismissing appeal and revision of the petitioner vide annexure P/11 and confirming the orders of removal, petitioner has filed this petition.

(2.) PETITIONER was employed as Trademan No. 31 in the Second Battalion saf, Bhopal and was posted in the ATC Tower, Air Port, Bairagarh, Bhopal at the relevant time. On 20-6-1992 Company Commandant of the Battalion Shri r. C. Sharma was conducting his routine night check when at about 1. 45 hours in the night intervening 20th and 21st June, 1992 when he reached the Barracks where the members of the force were staying, he found some commotion and voice of a lady coming from a particular barrack, he therefore immediately summoned constable Shri Chandan Singh, Shri Man Bahadur, Shri Roop Singh, shri Janki Prasad and others, went to the Barrack from where the voice came when it was found that in the barrack petitioner Ram Prakash Trademan, was in the company of a lady who was later identified as one Saraswati Bai living in the area, immediately message was sent to Police Station from where ASI came in the night and took away the petitioner and the lady for further action, on the ground that petitioner was found in the company of a lady unauthorizedly in the night at about 1. 45 AM in the barrack in a highly prohibited security zone, a charge-sheet was issued to the petitioner, who given his explanation and the same being found unsatisfactory Shri Gurudayal Singh Gill, Assistant Commandant was appointed as Inquiry Officer for conducting a enquiry, who after enquiry submitted his report on 10-9-1992 holding the petitioner guilty of the charges levelled against him. On the basis of finding of guilt recorded by the Inquiry officer penalty was imposed upon the petitioner, appeal and revision filed to the competent authority having been dismissed, this petition was filed initially in the year 1995 before the M. P. State Administrative Tribunal and after winding up of the tribunal matter stands transferred to this Court.

(3.) SHRI P. N. Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner is an illiterate class-IV employee who does not know about his rights and is not aware of the formalities which are to be complied with in the matter of conducting departmental enquiry, it is stated by him that petitioner is falsely implicated in the matter and has been punished in an arbitrary manner which is not justified. Referring to the Rojnamcha said to have been maintained in the Police Station, bairagarh as contained in Annexure A/1 dated 20-6-1992 Shri P. N. Gupta, learned counsel tried to emphasize that in this report it is only stated that when the company commandant Shri R. C. Sharma, heard some noise and when he went to the barrack, petitioner was found in the company of a woman and when the woman was asked as to why she has come there, she did not say anything, therefore, Shri Gupta, emphasized that this is the story as per the first information available on record but subsequently before the Inquiry Officer and before other authorities the story has been developed and it is now indicated that on enquiry it was stated by the lady that she had come to collect some money and that her husband is in jail, therefore, she has come to take money from the petitioner. Inter alia contending that the statement made in the enquiry by the witnesses particularly by Shri R. C. Sharma Company Commander and the facts indicated in Rojnamcha of Police Station, Bairagarh as contained in Annexure A/1 are entirely different and there is serious discrepancies in the statement of witnesses which amounts to perversity in the finding of the competent authority, interference in the matter is sought for. Taking me through the statement of Shri r. R. Yadav ASI recorded before the Inquiry Officer and the report made in the rojnamcha Annexure A/1 so also the statement of some of the witnesses examined in the enquiry, Shri P. N. Gupta contended that petitioner is a poor illiterate employee belonging to the reserved community and has been falsely implicated and punished which is highly improper and illegal, finally on the ground of perversity in the finding recorded by the Inquiry Officer, interference in the matter is sought for in this petition. Shri Gupta, emphasized that the punishment imposed is too harsh and sympathetic consideration has to be given in the matter as petitioner is a illiterate person belonging to the reserved category. It was further emphasized by him the punishment imposed is highly excessive and disproportionate and therefore this Court should interfere in the matter, it was also argued by Shri P. N. Gupta, learned counsel for petitioner that in the charge-sheet and the proceedings held, lady Smt. Saraswati Bai is said to be a lady of doubtful character, it is stated that this statement was made by ASI Shri r. R. Yadav, but he has not produced any evidence or material to substantiate this contention and therefore, the charges that petitioner was found in the company of a lady of doubtful character is not established and therefore the entire action and the finding recorded is perverse and liable to be interfered with. In support of his contention he places reliance on the judgment of the Supreme court in the case of Juwarsingh and others vs. The State of M. P. , AIR 1981 SC 373, in the case of Union of India and another vs. G. Ganayutham (Dead) by l. Rs. , AIR 1997 SC 3387 and in the case of Ministry of Finance and another vs. S. B. Ramesh, AIR 1998 SC 853.