BRIJINDER KUMAR AGGARWAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE challenge in the present writ petition is to an order dated 11.02.2003 (Annexure P -1), whereby petitioner was retired in terms of Clause (d) of Rule 3.26 of Punjab Civil Services Rules, Volume I, Part I, read with Rule 5.32 -A(c) of Punjab Civil Services Rules, Volume II, as applicable to State of Haryana. The challenge in the writ petition is also to the recording of Annual Confidential Reports (for short 'ACR') for the year 1999 -2000 communicated on 23.01.2001 and on 30.01.2003 (Annexure P -5 and P -7).

(2.) THE challenge is also to the communication dated 04.02.2003 (Annexure P -2) issuing charge -sheet proposing action under Rule 7 of Haryana Civil Services (Punishment & Appeal), Rules, 1987. The challenge is also to legality and validity of order dated 24.05.2003 (Annexure P -3), whereby the suspension effected vide order dated 16.05.2000 has been revoked w.e.f. 21.01.2013 but the period of suspension has been ordered to be treated as not having spent on duty.

(3.) THE petitioner asserts that, all though, he has earned very good reports except in the year 1999 -2000, when he was graded "average and doubtful integrity". The basis of the said remarks is said to be a pseudonymous complaint made by the name of one Sumer Chand Jain. On the basis of said complaint, report was called by the High Court from the learned District Judge, Karnal, who sent his report on 01.05.2000. The learned Administrative Judge recommended that a preliminary enquiry be made by District & Sessions Judge (Vigilance), Haryana and also proposed transfer of the petitioner from Panipat. The complaint was that the petitioner is minting money in false and frivolous cases filed through one Shiv Bhargav, Advocate, Kurukshetra.