VIJAY SINGH YADAV Vs. BHOPAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner against the order dated 07.05.2018 passed by the respondents No.1 and 2 whereby the petitioner has been dismissed from the post of Assistant Grade- I, Bhopal Development Authority without holding the proper disciplinary proceedings in terms of applicable disciplinary procedure and also without supplying the copy of inquiry report and affording opportunity of hearing in terms of Rule 54 of the Madhya Pradesh Development Authority Services (Officers and Servants) Recruitment Rules, 1987.

(2.) The facts of the case are that the petitioner is an employee of the Bhopal Development Authority (in short "the BDA") and was posted as Assistant Grade-I. According to the petitioner, BDA is governed by the Madhya Pradesh Development Authority Services (Officers and Servants) Recruitment Rules, 1987 and hence it is further stated that in the departmental proceedings in case of an employee of BDA, the rules as prescribed under Madhya Pradesh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1966 (hereinafter referred to as "the CCA Rules") would not be applicable.

(3.) The allegations against the petitioner were that he was entrusted with the additional charge of Revenue Officer on 1.8.2013 and due to dereliction of duties, he was placed under suspension on 19-20.7.2016 whereby it was alleged that he was instrumental in allotment of lease to M/s Raj Homes Pvt Ltd, Bhopal in whose favour a registry was also executed by the other officers of BDA. The aforesaid notice has been issued under rule 9 of the CCA Rules which provides for suspension of a Government employee. Subsequently, on 29.8.2016 the petitioner was also served with a charge sheet and an Enquiry Officer and the Presenting Officer were also appointed for conducting the disciplinary proceedings on 7.9.2016. The petitioner filed his reply on 12.9.2016 rebutting the charges leveled against him but as the matter was kept pending by the authorities and no decision was taken, W.P. No.4741/2017 was filed by the petitioner challenging the order of suspension. However, the aforesaid petition was disposed of by this Court on 07.04.2017 with liberty to avail the remedy of appeal under the rules. Accordingly, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the competent authority on 23.05.2017 but the same has not been decided till date.