JAI CHAND Vs. COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was formerly a Patwari in Teiisil Rohru, district Mahasu. He was tried, along with others, of offences under Sections 363 and 368, I. P. C., & convicted thereof by the Magistrate first class, Rohru. On appeal, however, the petitioner was acquitted by the learned Sessions Judge of Mahasu. The petitioner had been suspended by the Collector, Mahasu, during the pendency of the criminal case. After his acquittal by the Sessions Court, the petitioner was served with a charge- sheet dated 14-7-1955 by the Collector, calling upon him to show cause why he should not be dismissed from Government service on account of his misconduct as a public servant. A reply was submitted by the petitioner on 25-7-1955. On 8-12 1955, the Collector passed an order, dismissing the petitioner from Government service. He has now filed the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, wherein I am requested to issue a writ to the Collector of Mahasu and the State of Himachal Pradesh, quashing the charge-sheet dated 14-7-1955 and the subsequent dismissal order of 8-12-1955 and directing the reinstatement of the petitioner from the date of his suspension.

(2.) When this petition came up for hearing to-day, I called upon learned counsel for the petitioner to state whether his client preferred an appeal against the order of dismissal and if so, with what result? Mr. Aukta replied that no appeal had been, filed. It is not disputed that an appeal lay to the Financial Commissioner against the order of the Collector dismissing the petitioner. The question is whether, under those circumstances, this Court should entertain a petition of this kind. I may refer to the following rulings :

(3.) Coming to the present case, the Collector passed the order of dismissal, holding that although the petitioner had been acquitted by the Court of Criminal Appeal, nevertheless,