BANSI LAL RAINA Vs. STATE OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BANSI Lil Raina the petitioner who was in the Government employment and was working as Patwari, incharge of State Subject Certificates in the office of Deputy Commissioner/Tehsil Office Srinagar was proceeded against before the Anti -Corruption Commission under the Jammu and Kashmir Government Servants Prevention of Corruption (Commission) Act, 1962, and was found guilty by the said commission of having received illegal gratification. On the basis of the report of the said Commission the Governor after considering the explanation furnished by the petitioner in response to the show cause notice ordered pre -mature retirement of the petitioner from the Government service. This order was made on 12 -9 -1975 vide order No. 50/GR of 1975 of even date. The petitioner has called in question the punishment awarded to him and has filed the present petition challenging the aforesaid order on the ground that there was no legal basis for issuing notice much less for pre -mature retirement. The petitioner has contended that the commission could recommend punishment as laid down in Rule 30 of the Jammu and Kashmir Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1956 hereinafter to be referred to as the Rules of 1956) and any one of the punishments as envisaged by the aforesaid Rules could be imposed upon the petitioner. But the petitioner was asked to show cause against the proposed punishment of premature retirement which is not a punishment as envisaged by Rule 30 of the Rules of 1956.

(2.) IN the reply affidavit filed by Syed Ghulam Hussain Dy. Secretary to Government of J & K Organization and Methods - (Vigilance) Department, it has been affirmed that an enquiry was held by the Anti corruption Commission and the petitioner was found guilty of corruption. On the basis of the report submitted by the Commission to the Governor the pre -mature retirement of petitioner was ordered after he was given an opportunity to show cause against the proposed punishment. The Rule 30 of the said Rules of 1956 clearly provides the punishment of pre -mature retirement to be awarded to any Government servant in a fit and proper case, the said rule does not limit the power of the Governor to impose appropriate punishment upon a Government servant.

(3.) THE short question that has been debated before me by Shri J. N. Bhan appearing for the petitioner is that the punishment of pre -mature retirement awarded in the case of the petitioner is illegal in as -much as the same is not envisaged by Rule 30 of the Rules of 1956. The learned counsel has also referred to Sec. 17 of the Act which provides. "After the conclusion of the inquiry, the Commission shall record its findings on the various articles of charges and submit is recommendation to the Governor. ...... ...... ...... In cases where any of the charges are held to have been established against the accused, the Com mission shall recommend, in the case of the accused who is in the service of the Government of Jammu and Kashmir.... .... .... One of more of the punishments specified in the Rules of 1956 to be awarded to him".