Punjab-Haryana High Court
State Of Pb vs Gurmail Ram on 15 April, 2024
Author: Suvir Sehgal
Bench: Suvir Sehgal
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:050354
2024:PHHC:050354
RSA-3266-1999 (O&M) -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
(231)
RSA-3266-1999 (O&M)
Date of decision:- 15.04.2024
State of Punjab and another ... Appellants
Versus
Gurmail Ram ... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL
Present:- Mr. Anil Bansal, DAG, Punjab
for the appellants.
Ms. Aarushi Garr, Advocate
for the respondent.
****
SUVIR SEHGAL, J. (ORAL)
CM-5578-C-1999
1. Exemption, as prayed for, is granted.
2. Application is allowed.
Main case
1. Ms. Aarushi Garr, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of
respondent and has filed Power of Attorney, which is taken on record.
2. Defendants-appellants have approached this Court challenging
the judgment and decree passed by the learned Additional District Judge,
Jalandhar.
3. Brief facts may be noticed.
4. Plaintiff-respondent, Gurmail Singh, who was working as a
Conductor, was placed under suspension on 07.08.1986 on the basis of a
complaint given by the checking staff. He was issued a charge-sheet vide
Memo dated 02.09.1986 on the allegation that he failed to issue tickets to
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:050354
2024:PHHC:050354
RSA-3266-1999 (O&M) -2-
the passengers and had instigated the passengers against the checking staff.
A departmental enquiry conducted and by order dated 20.07.1987 passed
by the General Manager, one annual increment was stopped with
cumulative effect. Plaintiff filed a suit for declaration to the effect that the
said order is illegal and for consequential relief.
5. Upon notice, suit was contested by the defendants by taking
various preliminary objections. It was submitted that the punishment order
had been passed after complying with the procedure prescribed under the
Punjab Civil Services (Punishment & Appeal) Rules, 1970. Issues were
framed on the basis of the pleadings of the parties and after they led
evidence, Trial Court by judgment and decree dated 30.03.1995, dismissed
the suit. Aggrieved, plaintiff filed an appeal, which was accepted by the
learned Additional District Judge by judgment dated 18.03.1999. Judgment
and decree of the Trial Court was set aside and the suit was accepted.
Defendants have filed the instant appeal in the above backdrop.
6. I have heard counsel for the parties and examined the record with
their able assistance.
7. Sole ground on which the judgment and decree passed by the
Trial Court has been reversed by the learned Additional District Judge is
that the punishment order dated 20.07.1987, Ex.D-1, is non-speaking. After
the enquiry report was received, the defendants issued a show cause notice
to the plaintiff-respondent, who submitted his reply. Perusal of the
impugned punishment order shows that the punishing authority has not
reverted to the reply at all. The explanation given by the plaintiff in his
reply has not been noticed. Punishing authority has simply endorsed the
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:050354
2024:PHHC:050354
RSA-3266-1999 (O&M) -3-
findings of the enquiry officer and has passed the penal order. This has
resulted in a breach of the principles of natural justice. Consequently, this
Court does not find any reason to interfere with the judgment passed by the
First Appellate Court.
8. Finding no merit in the appeal, it is hereby dismissed with no
order as to costs.
15.04.2024 (SUVIR SEHGAL)
Kamal JUDGE
Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No
Whether Reportable Yes/No
3 of 3
