RANDHIR SINGH Vs. HARYANA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India challenges the orders Annexures P-4, P-6, P-10, P-15, P-20, P-24, P-27 and P-29 inflicting various punishments on the petitioner, which in service jurisprudence are known as "minor punishments".

(2.) After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the considered opinion that the order Annexure P-4, P-6, P-10 and P-20 cannot be sustained because these orders have been passed after issuance of charge-sheets under Regulation 7 of the Haryana State Electricity Board Employees (Punishment and Appeal) Regulation, 1990 (hereinafter referred to as "regulation").

(3.) A Full Bench of this Court has considered the question as to whether after issuance of charge-sheet under Rule 7 of the Haryana Civil Service (Punishment and Appeal) Rules 1987 for inflicting of major penalty, the employer is entitled to accept the explanation furnished by way of reply by the delinquent officer and impose a minor penalty without holding any inquiry. It has been held by the Full Bench that after a charge-sheet has been issued to delinquent officer for holding departmental inquiry contemplating imposition of major penalty, then no short-cut method is permissible even for imposing of minor penalty. It is not disputed that the respondent-Board has issued charge-sheet to the petitioner for imposition of major penalty and without holding an inquiry accepted his explanation for imposing minor penalty. The orders Annexure P-4, P-6, P-10 and P-20 have been passed inflicting minor penalty. Therefore, it is obvious that such a course is not permissible in law as ruled by the Full Bench of this Court in C.W.P. No. 3661 of 1999 (Dr. K.G. Tiwari, SDO, Animal Husbandry (Retd.) v. State of Haryana and Ors.) decided on 20th December, 2001. Therefore, these impugned orders are liable to be quashed.