Tirlok Singh Rawat vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2024 Latest Caselaw 28083 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Tirlok Singh Rawat vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 4 October, 2024

Author: Milind Ramesh Phadke

Bench: Milind Ramesh Phadke

           NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-GWL:17530




                                                               1                                WP-30497-2024
                             IN     THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                   AT GWALIOR
                                                        BEFORE
                                      HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE
                                                  ON THE 4 th OF OCTOBER, 2024
                                                 WRIT PETITION No. 30497 of 2024
                                                   TIRLOK SINGH RAWAT
                                                          Versus
                                        THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
                          Appearance:
                                Shri Prashant Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.
                                Shri Deepak Khot, Government Advocate for the respondents/State.

                                                                ORDER

Present petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been preferred by the complainant, at whose instance departmental proceedings were initiated against respondent no.7. Though in the departmental enquiry respondent no.7 has been penalized with imposition of minor penalty of stoppage of two increments without cumulative effect and fine of Rs.1,000/- with further direction to deposit a sum of Rs.1,97,142/-, alleging the punishment to be not proportionate to the allegations and on lesser side, the present petition has been preferred seeking relief of quashment of the punishment order and imposition of appropriate

punishment.

2. Learned counsel for the State Shri Deepak Khot, at the outset, has raised a preliminary objection that present petition, in the hands of petitioner who is a complainant, is not maintainable, as the capacity of a complainant in catena of judgments has been crystalized and it has been observed that, at the most, he can act as a witness in proceedings initiated against the culprit but he cannot act as an adversarial litigant. Thus, it is prayed that the present petition be dismissed.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-GWL:17530

2 WP-30497-2024

3. Per contra Shri Sharma appearing for the petitioner submits that it is true that on the basis of complaint made by the petitioner, departmental enquiry was initiated against respondent no.7 which culminated in a minor punishment, but the said punishment was not in proportion to the misconduct which has been held to be proved against him. As such, in the fitness of things, it is required that the said punishment be enhanced to some major punishment.

4. After hearing the rival contentions, this Court finds strength in the arguments advanced by learned Government Advocate Shri Deepak Khot. It is a settled proposition of law that a complainant cannot act as an adversarial litigant and, at the most, his capacity would be that of a witness in any proceedings initiated against a person, against whom complaint has been made.

5. Thus, this Court does not find any reason to even issue direction to any

Government official to consider the representation of the petitioner and take a decision over the same.

Petition being misconceived, is, hereby, dismissed.

(MILIND RAMESH PHADKE) JUDGE

(and)