B.D. SAHNI Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner in this writ petition challenges the order of punishment dated 26.3.1998, Annexure P -6, by which his two increments have been stopped with cumulative effect.

(2.) BRIEF facts, as narrated in the writ petition, are that the petitioner was served with a charge -sheet on 17.10.1995 vide Annexure P -1. He submitted his reply to the charge -sheet, vide Annexure P -2. Being not satisfied with the reply of the petitioner, an Inquiry Officer was appointed to hold a detailed inquiry. The Inquiry Officer in his report, Annexure P -3, exonerated the petitioner of the charges. The respondents, though agreeing with the finding of the Inquiry Officer, but issued a show cause notice to the petitioner on 29.8.97, vide Annexure P -4, as to why punishment of stoppage of two increments with future effect be not imposed upon him. The petitioner filed reply to the show cause notice, vide Annexure P -5. However, the respondents passed the impugned order, vide Annexure P -6 imposing a penalty of stoppage to two future increments with cumulative effect on the petitioner.

(3.) IN the written statement filed by the respondents, the irregularities committed by the petitioner have been highlighted. Besides, it is averred that on receipt of the report of the Inquiry Officer, the Punishing Authority had to pass an order applying its own mind to the whole case and had to reach at its own independent conclusion uninfluenced by any other person. It is further stated in the reply that the acceptance of the proposals made by the subordinates in the office note was not sufficient.