HARI RAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner Hari Ram has assailed the Order Annexure 1 5, dated November 9,1981 by which after his retirement, enquiry was ordered to be initiated under R.170 of the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951 (for short the R.S.R,' hereinafter) and Chairman Board of Revenue, Ajmer was appointed as Disciplinary Authority. He has also challenged the chargesheet Annexure -3, statement of allegations Annexure -4 and the Notice Annexure -2 on the ground that there being no allegations against him for causing any pencuniary loss to the Government on account of any act or omission on his part, all these proceedings initiated after his retirement are invalid and the orders referred to above deserve to be quashed.

(2.) THE petitioner being in the cadre of Rajasthan Tehsildar Service was working as Assistant Settlement Officer when he was retired on January 30,1981. After a few months, it was proposed to take the proceedings against him because of certain irregularities in certain decisions taken by him. As such, vide Order Annexure -15 decision was taken to initiate enquiry against him under Section 170(b)(i) and under Clause [iii] of the R.S.R., Chairman Board of Revenue was appointed as Disciplinary Authority. As stated earlier, the Disciplinary Authority chargesheeted him for the various irregularities and the chargesheet was served with him along with Annexure -4, the statement of allegations.

(3.) RULE 1 70 of the R.S.R. provides for recoveries of loss from the pension. It reads as under: