NARINDER KAUR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PLAINTIFF-Satnam Singh had filed a suit for declaration challenging the order dated 4.10.2004, whereby his services were terminated, and order dated 30.12.2005, passed in appeal, whereby the order dated 4.10.2004 was upheld.

(2.) THE case of the plaintiff, in brief, was that he had joined the services of Punjab Roadways in the year 1982. Some false reports were made against the plaintiff. A charge sheet dated 15.1.2005 was served on the plaintiff on the basis of the said false reports. Plaintiff sent his reply to the charge sheet. However, an Inquiry Officer was appointed by the Appointing Authority. During the Inquiry proceedings, plaintiff was not afforded full opportunity to present his case. THE Inquiry Officer conducted the inquiry in complete violation of the relevant rules. Plaintiff was supplied with the copy of the inquiry report and he submitted his reply to the show cause notice. However, without considering the reply, filed by the plaintiff to the show cause notice, the impugned order of punishment was passed. Appeal, filed by the plaintiff against the said order, was dismissed by the Appellate Authority. Hence, the suit was filed by the plaintiff. Defendants, in their written statement, admitted the fact that the plaintiff was working as a conductor with them. It was averred that on the basis of allegations levelled against the plaintiff, departmental inquiry was conducted against him in accordance with rules. Full opportunity was granted to the plaintiff to present his case during inquiry proceedings. THE impugned orders had been validly passed.

(3.) VIDE judgment and decree dated 4.5.2009 Civil Judge, Junior Division, Amritsar dismissed the suit of the plaintiff. The said judgment and decree were upheld in appeal, filed by the legal representatives of the plaintiff, vide judgment and decree dated 14.12.2009 by Additional District Judge, Amritsar. Hence, the present appeal by the legal representatives of the plaintiff.