G P SHARMA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DR . G.P. Sharma has filed this writ petition being aggrieved from the order of the stoppage of two grade increments with cumulative effect, imposed upon him by the Government by letter dated 3 -1 -70. He filed review application under Section 33 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal Rules) (hereinafter called, 'the CCA Rules') and after the same was rejected, he invoked the powers of the Government under rule 34 of these very rules and with that end in view, filed second review application.

(2.) THE facts in brief giving rise to this case centers round an incident of the alleged illegal gratification of Rs. 20/ - demanded by Dr. Sharma for which a trap was done by the Anti -corruption Department on 10 -10 -61. The case of Ajit Singh, who filed complaint before the Anti -corruption Department was that Dr. Sharma was working as Medical Jurist at the Civil Hospital, Sriganganagar. Ajit Singh approached for examination of injuries which be received at the hands of another party and for obtaining a certificate since It was a medico legal case. It is alleged that Dr. Sharma demanded Rs. 50/ - as bribe but later on, agreed to accept Rs. 20/ As Sri Singh was not agreeable, he made a complaint to the Deputy Suprin tendent of Police. Anti Corruption Department; Sriganganagar for arranging a trap Accordingly, a trap was at ranged and the signed two currency notes of the denomination of Rs. 10/ - were given to Ajit Singh who went to Dr. Sharma and on the fixed signal. The Deputy Superintendent of Police raided the place and asked Dr. Sharma to produce the notes. The tainted money was recovered from above the table and seized. The plea taken by Dr. Sharma was that he could have taken fees for examining the injuries of Ajit Singh for giving him a certificate. A reference was made to the Director of Medical and Health Science, Rajasthan Jaipur, regarding the doctors competence to charge fees from a person at his residence for his injuries and the reply was not specific. It was mentioned that no fees has been prescribed and the Medical Jurist could charge double the fees chargeable by Civil Assistant Surgeon, Class II A Civil Assistant Surgeon of Glass II was entitled to a fee of Rs. 3/ -. On the above allegation, an enquiry was conducted and Dr. Sharma was found guilty.

(3.) IT was argued by Mr. Mridul that review application was filed by his client on 21 -8 -70 and inspite of the fact that almost nine years have passed, no decision has been given on this application. It was pointed out that this being the main grievance, the writ was admitted after a show -came notice was given to the respondent and yet no steps were taken by the respondent No. 1 and 2 to get this matter decided one way or the other. From a perusal of the order sheet, it appears that at the time of consideration of the stay application, the Court mentioned that it was expected that the review petition shall be decided At an early date. However, all these expectations have been belied and the matter remains where it was prior to the filing of the writ application.