PURAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WHETHER a departmental enquiry can be ordered subsequent to the recording of an adverse annual confidential report on the identical or substantially the same material is the meaningful question which has necessitated this reference to the Division Bench.

(2.) THE facts are neither in serious dispute nor in a wide compass. The Petitioner was posted as Sub -Divisional Officer at Kurali, in the year 1969 -70. He got executed certain maintenance and construction works thereat. Apparently for his work and conduct for the year, an adverse annual confidential report was recorded and wide annexure P/1, dated July 24, 1970, the same was communicated to him with a warning to improve his conduct in future. The Petitioner submitted a detailed representation against these adverse remarks, - -vide annexure P/2, dated November 6, 1970 and acting thereon the Government elicited the comments of the authorities below and on receipt of the same the Petitioner's representation was rejected.

(3.) THIS writ petition first came up before my learned brother S.P. Goyal, J. sitting singly and reliance was placed before him on two Single Bench decisions in Bhajan Singh v. Shri Bahal Singh and Anr., 1967 S.C.R. 601 and Kartar Singh v. The State of Haryana etc., 1973 CLJ 56. Expressing a doubt about the correctness of the views expressed therein, the matter was referred to the Division Bench and that is how it is before us now.