GURCHARAN SINGH Vs. PUNJAB STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PLAINTIFF -appellant has come up in regular second appeal against the judgment of reversal dated 05.02.1991 passed by the Additional District Judge, Amritsar, whereby appeal filed by the State of Punjab -defendant against the judgment and decree dated 01.10.1988 passed by the Sub Judge, Ist Class, Amritsar, has been accepted and suit of the plaintiff for declaration has been dismissed.

(2.) GURCHARAN Singh -plaintiff (appellant herein) was working as Assistant Fitter in the workshop of Punjab Roadways, Patti. An enquiry was instituted against him on the allegations that he had got issued some spare parts, but had not used the same in those buses for which the same were got issued. On 22.10.1984, a charge sheet was issued to him alleging that on 24.08.1984, certain spare parts were got issued by him for repairing he brakes of bus No. 2541, however, he did not fit those parts in the bus, rather wanted to steal the same. When on the basis of information, the Traffic Manager was to make checking, the plaintiff, on getting information from the Chowkidar, restored those parts in the store and same were taken into possession. Reply to the charge sheet was filed by him. The enquiry officer held that neither the spare parts were found from the possession of the plaintiff nor he was found carrying the same. As a result of this, he was exonerated of the charges that he had intended to steal those spare parts. However, it was observed that the plaintiff had been negligent in performance of his duty and returning the spare parts which could not used. Therefore, the enquiry officer had recorded the finding on 20.08.1985 that the delinquent employee was negligent. The punishing authority had agreed with the finding of the enquiry officer. Thereafter, a show cause notice dated 03.04.1986 was issued, to which, the delinquent employee (plaintiff) filed his reply. After considering the reply and giving personal hearing, the General Manager, Punjab Roadways, Patti, vide order dated 06.05.1986 imposed the penalty of stoppage of one increment of the plaintiff -appellant with cumulative effect and also forfeited the arrears of pay during his suspension period. The plaintiff challenged the aforesaid order by filing a suit.

(3.) FROM the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed by the trial Court: -