A K CHADHA Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has impugned the order of his termination from service dated August 7, 1981, in this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) The petitioner was selected as Manager of the Harkalyan Binders and Printers, Panchkula in the year 1976 by the Departmental Selection Committee constituted by respondent No. 2, namely, the Haryana Harijan Kalyan Nigam Ltd., Chandigarh, which is a Government Company; that respondent No. 2, framed Bye-Laws called the Haryana Harijan Kalyan Nigam Employees Service Bye-Laws (hereinafter referred to as the Bye-Laws); that these Bye-Laws do not contain the provisions regarding the procedure to be followed for imposition of penalty, etc.; that respondent No. 2 by a resolution adopted the Punjab Civil Service (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1952 (for short, the Rules); that in November 1980, the Board of Ayurvedic and Unani System of Medicines, Haryana placed an order for publication/preparation of certain registers with the Press belonging to respondent No. 2; that according to the original letter, the Registrar had requested the petitioner to complete the job within two months and this period was later on enhanced to three months; that a complaint was received by respondent No. 2 that the job was not completed within the prescribed period because of lapse on the part of the petitioner; that respondent No. 3 vide his letter dated May 8, 1981, served a charge-sheet on the petitioner under bye-laws 6.1 and 6.2 of the Bye-laws read with rule 7 of the Rules; that the petitioner filed reply to the charge-sheet against the accusation made; that respondent No. 3 appointed the Executive Officer to Act as the Enquiry Officer; that the Enquiry Officer after recording the statement of the petitioner submitted his report and held that the charges stood proved against him; respondent No. 2 after receipt of the enquiry report served a show-cause notice on the petitioner to show-cause why penalty of dismissal from service be not imposed on him; that the petitioner filed a detailed reply to the show-cause notice and after considering the same, the impugned order terminating the petitioner's services was passed by respondent No. 2. The petitioner unsuccessfully challenged the said order before the Appellate Authority under the Bye-Laws.

(3.) The undisputed facts which stand established from the pleadings and the documents placed on record, briefly, are :-