JAGDISH CHAND Vs. STATE OF H P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has prayed for quashing of Annexure A-2 dated 09.09.2004 ordering recovery of Rs. 13,39,268/- in installments from petitioner and quashing of Office order dated 16.09.2004 ordering recovery of Rs. 4,000/- per month from the salary of the petitioner from September, 2004 onwards.

(2.) THE facts, in brief, are that petitioner after superannuation from Army was appointed as driver against the post of Ex-serviceman in the year 1986 in the department. MACC Nos. 44, 45 and 46-S/2 of 1999 were filed before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Shimla. THE petitioner was respondent No.3 in those petitions. THE Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Shimla awarded a sum of Rs. 13,39,268/- on 30.06.2004 in those petitions. On the basis of award, Secretary (Health) to the Government of H.P. has requested respondent No.2 vide letter dated 9.9.2004 to ensure recovery of ` 13,39,268/- in instalments from petitioner. It has been alleged by petitioner that respondents No.1, 2 in their reply before the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal denied that petitioner was driving the vehicle in rash and negligent manner. But now, the respondents No.1, 2 have taken totally contrary stand, hence letter dated 9.9.2004 is liable to be quashed and set-aside.

(3.) THE respondents have filed reply and have taken preliminary objections that petitioner was driving vehicle No.HP-03- 2460 on 14.4.1999 and met with an accident. THE action was proposed against the petitioner and subsequently petitioner was suspended on 17.4.1999. THE petitioner has been convicted in Criminal Case No. 80-2 of 2003/99 under Sections 279, 337, 338 IPC by learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class (V), Shimla on 2.12.2003. THE Director of Health Services appointing authority of the petitioner has not been arrayed as party and therefore, the petition is not maintainable. On merits, it has been stated that respondent No.2 had initiated disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner, he was suspended. THE respondents have justified Annexures A-2 and A-4 and have prayed for dismissal of the petition.