PARTAP SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this writ petition is to the order dated 6.3.2006, Annexure P10, vide which departmental proceedings were initiated against the petitioner.

(2.) The petitioner was working as Secretary, Improvement Trust, Karnal and retired on 31.10.1995 on attaining the age of superannuation i.e. 58 years. Vide impugned order dated 6.3.2006, the Secretary, Improvement Trust, Karnal on the basis of order of Financial Commissioner and Principal Secretary to the Government, Haryana, Urban Development Department, Chandigarh dated 12.1.2006 intended to initiate disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner. One M/s. Piara Lal Kuldip Kumar filed Civil Writ petition No. 5370 of 1975 for allotment of big show room in Scheme No. 37. The Improvement Trust made a statement in the High Court and the Civil Writ petition was disposed of in the year 1976. Piara Lal filed an application dated 29.7.1976 addressed to Chairman, Improvement Trust and claimed allotment of show room as per undertaking in the Hon'ble High Court. The Chairman, Improvement Trust, allotted shop No. 1 in Scheme No. 37 as per undertaking given in the High Court. M/s. Piara Lal Kuldip Kumar preferred an appeal before the Financial Commissioner and Principal Secretary to Government of Haryana, Urban Development Department, Chandigarh Annexure R2/1, about 20 years of the allotment of the shop in favour of Piara Lal. It was observed by Shri N. Bala Baskar, IAS, Financial Commissioner and Principal Secretary to Government, Haryana that since the undertaking was in respect of allotment of show room to M/s. Piara Lal Kuldip Kumar but the shop has been allotted to Piara Lal, so on that count, Trust should enquire and fix responsibility on the employee/authorities responsible for non-compliance of the agreement/undertaking given before the High Court. In compliance to that order, the present show cause notice has been issued.

(3.) We have heard both sides and have gone through the record of the case.