STATE OF HARYANA Vs. S K GOYAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The defendants State of Haryana and others have lost concurrently before the two Courts below. The plaintiff filed a suit for declaration challenging the order dated September 17, 2003. It was claimed by the plaintiff that defendant No.2- Secretary to Government Haryana, had imposed a punishment of stoppage of one increment without cumulative effect and the aforesaid order was illegal and bad.

(2.) The facts which emerge from the record show that the charge-sheet dated January 16,2003 was served upon the plaintiff. A show cause notice was issued to the plaintiff for imposition of a minor penalty. As noticed above, the order of punishment was passed on September 17,2003 imposing punishment of stoppage of one increment without cumulative effect under Rule 8 of the Haryana Civil Services (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1987. The Courts below have noticed that although the aforesaid punishment was a minor punishment but because of the fact that the plaintiff was to retire w.e.f. March 31, 2005 and his next increment was due as on April 1, 2005, therefore, in effect, the stoppage of one increment without cumulative effect would result in stopping the aforesaid increment permanently affecting the pensionary benefits payable to the plaintiff.

(3.) As a result of the aforesaid findings, it has also been held by the two Courts below that because of the consequential effect of the aforesaid punishment, the procedure for imposition of a major penalty was required to be followed. Consequently, the order dated September 17, 2003 has been held to be illegal and bad. The suit of the plaintiff has been decreed by the trial Court and the appeal of the defendants failed before the learned first Appellate Court.