PHOOL SINGH DHAKAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner by way of this writ petition assails the action of initiating departmental enquiry against the petitioner under Rule 17 of the CCA Rules, 1958 and also subsequently punishing the petitioner stating that the petitioner has not filed any reply to the charges.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the charge sheet issued to the petitioner does not reflect any misconduct in terms of the Rajasthan Civil Service Conduct Rules 1971. Learned counsel submits that from the statement of allegations, it is apparent that the petitioner joined on the post as a Superintending Engineer on 10/4/2010. The allegation levelled is of not having issued show cause notice to one Shri Raj Kumar Nebhnani, the then Executive Engineer for alleged discrepancy committed by him and it is stated that such information was received in the office on 26/2/2010.

(3.) Learned counsel submits that the petitioner was not holding the office on 26/2/2010 and after joining the petitioner issued shown cause notice to the concerned officer on 10/6/2010 within a period of two months. It is submitted that there is no action taken by the Department laying down time frame to issue show cause notice in the cases of discrepancy committed by any subordinate Officer. It is further submitted that the petitioner had several times requested the respondents to make available the documents which were not provided. However, he filed a detailed reply and pointed out that the concerned Officer- Raj Kumar Nebhnani had been promoted as a Superintending Engineer and therefore there was a doubt whether the petitioner who was also holding the post of Superintending Engineer, issued show cause notice to him who is officer of the same rank. Be that as it may it is his submission that as there is no circular laying down time frame, the petitioner cannot be said to have committed misconduct and charge sheet could not have been issued to him.