PRAVEEN GUPTA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner who had served on the post of Medical Officer under the Health and Family Welfare Department, State of Punjab has filed the instant writ petition impugning order dated 23.6.2010, Annexure P10, whereby he has been removed from service. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was served with the charge sheet dated 31.10.2007 under Rule 8 of the Punjab Civil Service (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1970 on the following articles of charge:

(2.) The reply submitted by the petitioner to the charge sheet having been found unsatisfactory, an Enquiry Officer was appointed vide order dated 22.9.2008 to enquire into the allegations levelled in the charge sheet. The enquiry report was furnished on 19.3.2009 returning findings against the petitioner. Vide letter dated 20.4.2009, a copy of the enquiry report was forwarded to the petitioner to raise objections, if any. The reply/objections having been considered and upon approval having been accorded by the Punjab Public Service Commission, the Principal Secretary, Punjab Government Health and Family Welfare Department has passed the impugned order dated 23.6.2010 imposing major penalty of removal from service upon the petitioner.

(3.) Mr. R.K. Chopra, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner, has confined the challenge to the order of removal on two grounds. It has been argued that the Punishing Authority has ignored the fact that the petitioner possessed an unblemished service record of 22 years and the gravity of the charge proved against the petitioner i.e. absence from duty cannot justify the imposition of the extreme penalty of removal from service. Learned counsel would argue that there was no complaint as regards the integrity of the petitioner and the punishment awarded is wholly disproportionate in relation to the charge levelled and proved against him. It has been urged strenuously that the ends of justice would be met if the punishment of removal from service was to be set aside and substituted with an order of compulsory retirement. Towards such submission, heavy reliance has been placed upon a Single Bench judgment of this Court rendered in Civil Writ Petition No. 2073 of 1988, Smt. Kailash Sharma (since deceased) through Shri Om Parkash Sharma (husband) v. State of Punjab and others, decided on 7.1.2004, Annexure P11.