DARSHAN SINGH HANDA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who was working on the post of Clerk under the Directorate of Industries & Commerce, State of Punjab, has filed the instant writ petition impugning the order dated 6.7.2012 (Annexure P-5), passed by the Director of Industries & Commerce, Punjab, whereby he has been dismissed from service. Further challenge is to the order dated 23.3.2013 (Annexure P-7) passed by the Appellate Authority i.e. the Principal Secretary, Govt. of Punjab, Department of Industries & Commerce affirming the order passed by the Punishing Authority. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has vehemently argued that prior to passing of the impugned orders no departmental proceedings had been initiated against the petitioner and the extreme penalty of dismissal from service has been imposed upon him solely on account of the conviction of the petitioner under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Counsel would argue that mere conviction does not entail automatic dismissal. It has further been submitted that even an appeal preferred against the order of conviction is pending adjudication before this Court and as such there was no justification with the respondent-department to have dismissed the petitioner from service without even awaiting the outcome of such appeal. Still further, counsel argues that the respondent-department has not afforded any weightage for the 33 years of service that the petitioner has already rendered till the date of passing of the order of dismissal.

(2.) Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner at length and having perused the pleadings on record, I am of the considered view that no interference is called for at this stage.

(3.) There would be no dispute as regards the proposition that mere conviction does not entail automatic termination of service. It is obligatory for the Punishing Authority to take into account the conduct of the employee which has led to his conviction and also to consider as to whether such conduct would warrant the imposition of extreme penalty of dismissal. Such dictum of law was laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Union of India Vs. Tulsi Ram, 1985 2 SLR 576.