LAWS(P&H)-2006-9-367

STATE OF PUNJAB Vs. K C DUGGAL

Decided On September 25, 2006
STATE OF PUNJAB Appellant
V/S
K C DUGGAL Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present regular second appeal has been filed by the State of Punjab against concurrent findings decreeing the suit of the plaintiff. The appeal suffers from a delay of 76 days, for condonation of which the appellant has filed C.M. No. 8733-C of 2006.

(2.) The plaintiff had filed the suit challenging order dated 19.12.1997 imposing penalty of compulsory retirement. The plaintiff had challenged the departmental enquiry on the ground that he was not supplied with essential documents which were relied upon by the defendants. He further contended that he had not been supplied a copy of the advice rendered by the Punjab Public Service Commission on the basis of which order of compulsory retirement had been passed. He relied upon Rule 14 of the Punjab Civil Services (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1970 which made it mandatory to supply a copy of the advice to the Government servant. He also relied upon a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State Bank of India v. D.C. Aggarwal, 1993 1 SCT 225. It was his further contention that during the course of the departmental enquiry he was wrongly proceeded against ex parte and no pre-emptory notice was served upon him. It was further his contention that the impugned order of penalty was imposed without there being any evidence to substantiate the charges.

(3.) The State Government, however, did not produce the enquiry file in evidence before the trial Court. Relying on the rules aforementioned and the fact that the enquiry file had been withheld by the State Government, the trial Court came to the conclusion that the enquiry proceedings against the plaintiff were not fair. The relevant observations of the trial Court are as hereunder:-