BIJENDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge in this writ petition has been given to the orders Annexure P-5 and P-7.

(2.) We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and with their assistance have gone through the record of this case.

(3.) The first contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that once the procedure for major penalty has started, then it is not open to the department to relegate to the minor punishment and switch over to Rule 8 of the Punjab Civil Service Rules which deals with the minor penalty. In support of his contention, the learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon 1997(1) SLR 431, 1986(1) SLR 484 and 1991 (5) SLR 263. We are not convinced with the first submission raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner. In this case the principles of natural justice have been complied with before passing the impugned order Annexure P-5. The reply of the petitioner was duly considered by the Punishing Authority.