AJAY SINGHAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the present petition, the petitioner has put to challenge order dated 12.12.2005 (Annexure P-9), by which he was dismissed from service as HCS Judicial Officer. There is further prayer for quashing the Haryana Civil Services (Punishment & Appeal) Rules, 1987 (for short 'Rules'), where no right of appeal was provided. Further prayer is made for quashing the Inquiry Report dated 28.02.2005 (Annexure P-4).

(2.) The petitioner joined as a Civil Judge (Junior Division-cumJudicial Magistrate) Second Class at Rohtak, on 03.05.1997, after his selection as such. On 24.08.1997, he was transferred from Rohtak to Karnal and thereafter, was transferred to Chandigarh on 03.06.2000 and remained posted at Chandigarh till the impugned order was passed. His disposal was progressive. Respondent No.3-Shri H.S. Bhalla was his District Judge at the relevant time at Chandigarh and he had been inimical to him for the reasons given by him in Para 5(I), 5(II), 5(IV) and 5(V) of the writ petition. Accordingly, respondent No.3 wanted to take revenge against him and that is the reason why action was taken by the High Court for holding inquiry against him and ultimately, dismissing him from service.

(3.) According to the petitioner, on 21.08.2002, at about 30 P.M., he was asked to attend the chamber of the learned District and Sessions Judge, where, respondent No.3 shouted at him that he had taken Rs. 10,000/- from 3-4 litigants through reader of the Court Shri Puran Chand, but the petitioner denied the same at the outset. Respondent No.3 told him that report was required to be submitted to the High Court about it on the same day, and therefore, the petitioner should submit explanation or should face the police which was already summoned and were waiting down stairs. Respondent No.3 manipulated the scene. Thus, he created an atmosphere so much of the pressure that a writing was taken from him under threat and fear of police action, which was, obviously, not voluntarily and thus, the writing was extorted and misused by respondent No.3 and ultimately by the High Court. The petitioner was served with charge-sheet dated 30.01.2003 inter alia on the ground that while posted as Civil Judge (Jr. Division)-cum-Rent Controller, Chandigarh, the petitioner received illegal gratification of Rs. 10,000/- from Shri Ashok Kumar, litigant, in the presence of Shri Puran Chand, Reader of his Court, at his residence for deciding the case in his favour, and thus, committed serious major misconduct. Regular inquiry was held and Enquiry officer submitted his report dated 28.02.2005. Thereafter, on 15.02005, High Court issued show-cause notice to the petitioner and requested the petitioner to show cause as to why report of Enquiry Officer should not be accepted for inflicting major penalty. The petitioner sought extension of time to file reply to the showcause notice and ultimately, he submitted his report to the show-cause notice. The petitioner sought personal hearing before the impugned order was passed, which was not given and therefore, the principles of natural justice were violated. The petitioner made representations, but of no use.