LAWS(RAJ)-2004-4-120

VINOD BHARTI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

Decided On April 26, 2004
Vinod Bharti Appellant
V/S
STATE OF RAJASTHAN Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner on 13/2/2001 against the respondents with a prayer that by an appropriate writ, order or direction, order dtd. 10/10/2000 (Annex P/1) by which the petitioner was directed to deposit the amount of Rs.56,440.00, order dtd. 16/8/2000 (Annex.P/12) passed by the Executive Engineer, City Division, PHED, Jodhpur, and order dtd. 11/8/2000 (Annex.P/13) passed by the Dy. Secretary-II, PHED by which workman Bhanwar Singh was paid the amount of arrears by debiting the same in petitioner's misc. advance account and order dtd. 17/10/2000 (Annex.P/14) passed by the Executive Engineer, PHED, City Division, Jodhpur by which the petitioner was directed to deposit a sum of Rs.56,440.00 and order dtd. 16/1/2001 (Annex. P/18) passed by the Superintending Engineer, Circle Pali (respondent No. 4) by which an amount of Rs.56,400.00 was ordered to be recovered from the salary of the petitioner in installments starting from Jan., 2001 be quashed and set aside.

(2.) The facts of the case as put forward by the petitioner are as under :

(3.) In this writ petition, the main case of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is a Government servant and a Government servant can be punished after holding enquiry under the provisions of Rajasthan Civil Service (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules of 1958) and since no enquiry under Rules 16 and 17 of the Rules of 1958 was initiated against the petitioner, therefore, the so called recovery is illegal and it cannot be effected and so far as enquiry report dtd. 8/9/99 (Annex.R/1) submitted by Superintending Engineer, PHED, City Circle, Jodhpur (respondent No. 2) is concerned, it is preliminary enquiry report and on the basis of that preliminary enquiry report dtd. 8/9/99 (Annex.R/1), a charge-sheet is issued and in absence of that charge-sheet and holding regular enquiry, the petitioner cannot be punished.