STATE OF PUNJAB Vs. PARSA SINGH TEJI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal under Clause X of the Letters Patent by the State of Punjab is directed against the order of the learned Single Judge whereby he accepted the petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed by Parsa Singh Teji respondent and set aside the order of the Punjab Government terminating the services of the respondent.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that the respondent was appointed Block Development Officer on probation in the erstwhile Pepsu State on 17th August, 1956. Later on, the probationary condition was removed and the respondent continued in temporary service. The respondent was posted as Block Development and Panchayat Officer at Dera Baba Nanak from 26th September 1957 to 23rd April 1960 when he was transferred to Guru Har Sahai in District Ferozepore. In September 1960 the respondent was charged with several acts of misconduct including misappropriation of money, and the statement of allegation forming the basis of those charges was served upon the respondent through the Deputy Commissioner, Ferozepore. The respondent submitted an explanation denying the charges against him. The Punjab Government thereupon on 5th February 1962 appointed Shri Gobinder Singh, I. A. S. , as Enquiry Officer to hold departmental enquiry into the charges against the respondent. Shri Gobinder Singh made a report dated 19th May 1962 holding that some of the charges including those relating to misappropriation of money had been proved against the respondent. The same day i. e. , on 19th May 1962 the Punjab Government passed an order withdrawing the departmental enquiry against the respondent which had been entrusted to Shri Gobinder Singh, Enquiry Officer, and forwarded a copy of the same to Shri Gobinder Singh. On 2nd June 1962-the Government of Punjab passed the order terminating the services of the respondent as Block Development and Panchayat Officer with immediate effect as no longer required. It is the above order which has been assailed by the respondent in his petition filed on 30th July 1963. It appears that when the respondent filed the petition he was not aware of the fact that the Enquiry Officer had made a report against the respondent. The respondent, accordingly, took the stand in his petition that the charges against him had not been established and his services had been terminated after the Punjab State had failed to substantiate the charges in the departmental enquiry. It was further stated that order about the termination pf the services of the respondent was a colourable order made with a view to remove the respondent from service by way of punishment.

(3.) THE petition was resisted by the appellant and it was averred that as the Government noticed in the year 1958 that some of the Block Development Officers were not up to the mark and their performance had not been satisfactory, the question of weeding out unsuitable Block Development Officers was taken up. The case remained under consideration till 1962 when it was finally decided that the services of the respondent along with two other Block Development and Panchayat Officers should be terminated being unsuitable officers for the posts which they were holding in accordance with the terms of their appointment as temporary Block Development and Panchayat Officers. The decision about weeding out the unsuitable Block Development and Panchayat Officers was taken independently of the enquiries pending against the officers in the Vigilance Department. The termination of services of the respondent, it is stated, had nothing to do with the enquiry conducted by the Vigilance Department against him. The services of the respondent along with two other Block Development and Panchayat Officers were terminated, according to the appellant, in the ordinary course entailing no penal consequences and in the bona fide exercise of the Government powers to remove temporary Government servants according to the terms of their appointment. The other allegations made by the respondent were denied by the appellant.