STATE OF H.P. Vs. LALITA TEGTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE respondent herein was working as JBT teacher in Government Primary School Bachuna. A Charge-sheet was served upon her under Rule 14 of the CCS (CCA) Rules vide memo dated 3-2-2000. The charges which were levelled against the respondent were as follows:

(2.) AN Inquiry Officer was appointed and the inquiry was conducted. The Inquiry Officer submitted his inquiry report and in this inquiry report Charge No.2 as stated by the Inquiry Officer is as follows:

(3.) IT is clear from the perusal of the aforesaid extracted portions of the Inquiry Report that the Inquiry Officer held the respondent guilty of indiscipline and insubordination on account of her having remained absence without leave for a period of 10 months and 13 1/2 days. This was not the original charge framed against her. The disciplinary authority on the basis of the charge, ordered termination of the services of the respondent. The respondent challenged the said order before the Tribunal and the Tribunal came to the conclusion that no specific answer had been given by the Inquiry Officer to the original imputation of charges and as such the Inquiry officer has totally mis-directed himself and therefore the order was set-aside. The Tribunal held that the Rules of natural justice had been violated inasmuch as the respondent was not given an opportunity to defend the charge for which she was eventually found guilty.