Punjab-Haryana High Court
Director Food Civil Supplies And ... vs Roshan Lal Moudgil on 2 May, 2024
Author: Suvir Sehgal
Bench: Suvir Sehgal
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:061036
-1- 2024:PHHC:061036
CM-5953-C-2022 IN/AND RA-RS-33-2022 IN
RSA-4060-2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
(247)
CM-5953-C-2022 IN/AND
RA-RS-33-2022 IN RSA-4060-2019
Date of decision:- 02.05.2024
The Director General, Food and Supplies Department, Haryana and
others ... Appellants
Versus
Roshan Lal Moudgil ... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL
Present:- Mr. Sharad Aggarwal, DAG, Haryana
for the applicants-appellants.
Mr. Shailender Singh Gill, Advocate
for the non-applicant/respondent.
****
SUVIR SEHGAL, J. (ORAL)
CM-5953-C-2022 IN RA-RS-33-2022
1. Prayer in the application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation
Act, 1961 is for condonation of delay of 167 days in the filing of the review
application.
2. Notice of the application was issued to the
non-applicant/respondent, who appeared before this Court in July, 2023.
However, no response has been filed to the application.
3. Heard counsel for the parties.
4. This Court has gone through the reasons assigned in the
application and is satisfied with the same.
5. Application is allowed.
6. Delay of 167 days in the filing of the review application is
condoned.
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:061036
-2- 2024:PHHC:061036
CM-5953-C-2022 IN/AND RA-RS-33-2022 IN
RSA-4060-2019
7. State counsel submits that the plaintiff-respondent had filed a suit
for declaration to the effect that charge-sheet dated 26.02.2009 along with
punishment order dated 28.10.2013 and subsequent orders, are illegal, null
and void and had also sought a decree for permanent injunction restraining
the defendants-appellants from effecting recovery of Rs.12,49,791/. State
counsel submits that after contest, the suit was dismissed by the Trial Court.
However, in first appeal filed by the plaintiff-respondent, the suit was
decreed and punishment order and subsequent orders were set aside as the
Appellate Court found that personal hearing had been given to the plaintiff-
respondent before passing of the punishment order by an official, who was
transferred and the punishment order was passed by the successor. State
counsel submits that the State remained unsuccessful in the second appeal,
which was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 30.08.2019. State
counsel submits that the punishment order has been passed pursuant to the
report submitted in an enquiry and in the absence of any liberty to the
defendants-State, the disciplinary proceeding is inconclusive and
permission be granted to conclude it.
8. Prayer in the review application has been opposed and counsel
for the plaintiff-respondent submits that the respondent has retired from
service in the year 2009 and his pensionary benefits have not being
released.
9. I have heard counsel for the parties and considered their
respective submissions.
10. Once the Court comes to a conclusion that the punishment order
deserves to be set aside on account of breach of principles of natural justice,
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:061036
-3- 2024:PHHC:061036
CM-5953-C-2022 IN/AND RA-RS-33-2022 IN
RSA-4060-2019
permission deserves to be granted to the departmental authorities to take the
disciplinary proceeding to its logical end. Therefore, prayer made by the
State counsel deserves to be accepted.
11. Accordingly, review application is disposed of. Liberty is granted
to the defendants-appellants to pass a fresh order, after hearing the plaintiff-
respondent and to conclude the enquiry proceedings. While passing order
afresh, departmental authorities would keep in view the fact that the
plaintiff-respondent has, in the meanwhile, retired from service on attaining
the age of superannuation. Needful be done within a period of four months
from the date of communication of a copy of this order.
12. Judgment dated 30.08.2019 passed by this Court is modified
accordingly.
(SUVIR SEHGAL)
JUDGE
02.05.2024
Kamal
Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No
Whether Reportable Yes/No
3 of 3
