RAM PHAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts relevant for the disposal of the writ petition are as under :-

(2.) Mr. I.S. Balhara, the learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that though many issues have been raised in this petition, but the matter that he would first like to agitate is that the sanction granted by the District Magistrate for the initiation of the Departmental Enquiry was without application of mind and without examining the facts of the case and as such the present petition was likely to succeed on this ground alone. He has pointed out that though a specific averment has been made by him to the above fact, there was no indication in the sanction order, Annexure P-2 or even in the written statement filed by the respondents as to the facts that had weighed with the District Magistrate persuading him to grant the sanction. Mr. Balhara has relied upon Delhi Administration v. Chanan Shah, 1969 SLR 217, State of Punjab v. Raj Kumar, 1988 AIR(SC) 805 and Union of India v. Ram Kishan, 1971 AIR(SC) 1402, in support of his arguments.

(3.) As against this, learned counsel for the respondent has argued that in the preliminary objection taken in the written statement, the facts and circumstances of the case which weighed with the authorities in ordering the departmental enquiry, had been clearly set out and as such there was no merit in the present petition.