RAM PARSHAD Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Plaintiff-appellant is challenging the impugned judgments and decrees whereby his suit has been dismissed by the trial Court which was affirmed by the appellate Court.

(2.) Adumbrated facts of the case are that the plaintiff-appellant filed a suit for declaration to the effect that his services were wrongly terminated by the General Manager, Punjab Roadways, Jalandhar-II on the basis of enquiry report, which is illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, biased, based on no evidence, cryptic, against the principles of natural justice and provisions of Punjab Civil Service (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1970. Plaintiff pleaded that he was working as a Conductor in the Punjab Roadways. On the basis of false report of the Checking Staff, he was placed under suspension and was charge- sheeted vide order dated 18.1.1988. Charges were that he committed fraud to the extent of Rs. 8.55 by not issuing tickets to two passengers, who were travelling from Sumeha to Tohana in his bus. He denied the charges, filed reply. Departmental enquiry was held against him. Plaintiff pleaded that the enquiry was not conducted in accordance with rules, reasonable opportunity to defend himself was denied to him; Enquiry Officer submitted report holding him guilty of charges. On the basis of the enquiry report, the General Manager terminated his service illegally. He gave notice under Section 80, Civil Procedure Code, and prayed that the impugned order of termination dated 7.10.1988 be declared void and illegal.

(3.) Defendant-respondent contested the suit. In their written statement, they inter alia pleaded that the Civil Court at Jalandhar has no jurisdiction to try the suit and no valid notice under Section 80, Civil Procedure Code, was given to the defendant before filing the suit. Merits were also controverted and it was denied that the departmental enquiry was vitiated on any count.