AMRIT LAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On September 13, 2004, the instant petition was allowed by a Division Bench of this Court and a direction was issued to release the pension due to the petitioner for the service rendered by him in Industries Department. This Court also fixed one month period for release of the arrears along with interest as per rules. The petitioner has retired from service in the year 1999. In para 14 of the written statement filed by the Director of Industries, Haryana, a patently incorrect stand was taken with the averments that 'no case of Sh. Shyam Dass Arya was routed through this department and even not in the notice of this Department.' The Division Bench expressed unhappiness with the kind of reply filed by the Director Industries, by denying any connection with its employee Sh.Shyam Dass Arya who in fact was an employee of the Industries Department and pension to him could not have been released possibly without the necessary and clear verification from that Department. The attitude of the Director has been commented upon to be casual as he failed to even verify the factual position before filing the reply. While allowing the writ petition, their Lordships of the Division Bench has made the following observations:-

(2.) In view of the above, we hold that Mr. Apoorva Kumar Singh, IAS, has adopted a casual attitude while filing the written statement in this Court which might have ended up in the dismissal of the writ petition. We deprecate the casualness in the drafting of reply by such like officer and hope and trust that such a casual attitude would not be repeated in future. The aforementioned anguish has to be expressed for the reason that the machinery of justice would be adversely affected if casual attitude adopted by the officers of the State is allowed to go unnoticed. Whenever, a written statement is filed by the State through its officers, this Court ordinarily takes it as a gospel truth and does not require its verification by summoning the record. Therefore, pointed attention of the officers of the State is required to be invited to this type of tendency. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we caution the officers, who have filed the erroneous reply, to be careful in future and if such like casual attitude is repeated then this Court would be compelled to take a more serious view. We also saddle the officer- Mr. Apoorva Kumar Singh with costs of Rs.10,000/- which shall be paid by him personally without crediting to the State exchequer within a period of one month from today.

(3.) A copy of this order be forwarded to the Chief Secretary, Haryana, to circulate amongst all Departments with the following instructions:-