LAWS(RAJ)-2018-2-181

SHAMBHU DAYAL S/O GANESH NARAYAN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN, THROUGH ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY, HOME AND JUSTICE, GOVERNMENT OF RAJASTHAN

Decided On February 01, 2018
Shambhu Dayal S/O Ganesh Narayan Appellant
V/S
State Of Rajasthan, Through Additional Chief Secretary, Home And Justice, Government Of Rajasthan Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petition was listed before the Court on 02.01.2018 and no Counsel had appeared on behalf of the petitioner to argue the matter and as such the case was adjourned. The case was called again today for hearing and no Counsel has appeared on behalf of the petitioner.

(2.) The petitioner in the instant petition has challenged the penalty of censure imposed on him by order dated 12.08.1993. The petitioner was issued a Memorandum under Rule 17 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the CCA Rules, 1958'), wherein two charges were levelled against him. It was alleged in charge No.1 that while the petitioner was posted as Sub Inspector-SHO at Police Station Bonli in the year 1993, one complainant Radhey Shyam Sharma had come to Police Station for lodging an FIR in respect of an incident where his crop was taken away by the accused party and his house was set on fire. The petitioner did not register the FIR of the said incident and further threatened the complainant to implicate him in a false case. Charge No.2 against the petitioner was with respect to not complying with the direction issued by the DGP, Jaipur for registering a case on 11.03.1993 and as such petitioner was alleged to have violated the orders of the higher officials.

(3.) The said two acts of the petitioner were termed as misconduct and accordingly his explanation was called. The petitioner filed reply to the memo of allegations and submitted that no misconduct was committed by him. The petitioner also denied that he failed to lodge the FIR of the alleged incident. On the contrary the petitioner submitted that complainant Radhey Shyam himself was an accused in Case No.21/1993 under Sections 447, 379 IPC and in order to create a defence, he had alleged that his FIR was not registered. The petitioner also denied the charge of receiving any letter from higher officials.