THE PUNJAB STATE AND ORS. Vs. JARNAIL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE State is in Regular Second Appeal against the concurrent findings recorded by both the Courts below decreeing the suit filed by the respondent -plaintiff for declaration that the orders dated 07.07.1975 and 19.5.1977 passed by the General Manager, Punjab Roadways, Ferozepur stopping one annual increment with cumulative effect on each occasion were null and void being illegal, wrong, perverse, unconstitutional and against the principles of natural justice, departmental instructions, procedure of inquiry and provisions of the Punjab Civil Services (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1970 (hereinafter referred to as the 'P&A Rules').

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case necessary for adjudication of the instant regular second appeal are that the respondent -plaintiff was serving under the appellant -defendant No. 2 as Conductor at Punjab Roadways Depot, Ferozepur. Vide orders dated 07.07.1975 and 19.05.1977, the General Manager, Punjab Roadways, Ferozepur Depot, stopped one annual increment each of the plaintiff with cumulative effect on the allegations that on 17.10.1974, the plaintiff while on duty on bus No. 2855 on being checked by Dev Raj, Inspector, was found to be not wearing the prescribed uniform besides, was not in possession of the complaint book. The explanation of the plaintiff called for by the General Manager was found to be unsatisfactory and as a result thereof, the General Manager stopped one increment of the plaintiff with cumulative effect. On a subsequent occasion, i.e. on 08.11.1976, bus of the plaintiff was checked at Village Shadde, on Ferozepur -Karmuwala route, and two passengers were found travelling without ticket from Ferozepur to Shadde and although the plaintiff had taken due fare from them, but had not issued tickets to them. In this case also, the explanation of the plaintiff was called and thereafter, the impugned order dated 19.05.1977 was passed by the General Manager stopping one annual increment with cumulative effect. The respondent -plaintiff impugned both the orders on the ground inter alia that they were passed by the General Manager in complete violation of the provisions of the P&A Rules, principles of natural justice and fair play. On the basis of the aforementioned pleas, the respondent - plaintiff sought a decree for declaration that the impugned orders were illegal, null and void, and inoperative.

(3.) IN the written statement, it was denied that the impugned orders were in violation of the principles of natural justice, fair play or Rules applicable. In addition thereto, a plea was taken that the suit was barred by limitation.