SURAJ PARKASH Vs. THE STATE AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SURAJ Parkash who was a clerk in the Irrigation Department of the Punjab State was dismissed from service by an order of the Governor passed on 4th of June, 1964, communicated to him by the Executive Engineer, Talwara Township on 24th of August, 1964. In this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, at the instance of Suraj Parkash, all that has been urged by his counsel is that the order of dismissal does not conform to the requirements of Articles 154 and 166 of the Constitution. It has also been faintly urged that the findings of the Inquiry Officer do not provide a sound basis for the order of dismissal which has been passed.

(2.) THE order of dismissal which is signed by Shri Hardev Singh Chhina, Secretary to Government, Punjab, Vigilance Department, is to this effect:

(3.) THE other contention of the learned counsel relates to the findings of the Inquiry Officer. It seems that the petitioner was charged with adulterous conduct with two women and one of these charges was established and on the other count it was held that the charge was not. proved. It appears that the Inquiry Officer also took into consideration the fact that the petitioner was not maintaining his wife though this was not one of the charges against the petitioner. In any event, the petitioner has been found guilty of a liaison with one of the two women mentioned in the charge sheet and the show -cause notice makes it clear that the order of dismissal was proposed only with respect to the charge which had been found established according to the report of the Inquiry Officer.