Punjab-Haryana High Court
Rajinder Kumar Arora And Another vs State Of Haryana And Others on 23 October, 2024
Author: Sanjeev Prakash Sharma
Bench: Sanjeev Prakash Sharma
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:139138-DB
LPA-1894-2024(O&M)
2024(O&M)
1
136
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
LPA-1894-2024(O&M)
2024(O&M)
Date of Decision: 23.10.2024
.10.2024
Rajinder Kumar Arora and another . . . . Appellants
Vs.
State of Haryana and others . . . . Respondents
****
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH
****
Present: Mr Sajjan Singh, Advocate for the appellants.
Mr.
****
SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral)
1. Present appeal has been preferred against the impugned
judgment/Order dated 24.07.2024 passed by the Single Judge of this Court,
whereby the learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition, with further
direction to respondent/Directorate
respondent/Director of Higher
er Education to take final decision
on the complaint made against the eighth respondent within six weeks of
receiving a certified copy of this order.
2. The case of appellant No.1 is that he was Incharge
ncharge of the
College and was handling all the affairs of the College and there were certain
complaints made against other respondents by some girl student
students' relating to
harassment and other matters. The preliminary inquiry was conducted and a
report was sent to the concerned officer relating to the action to be taken
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:139138-DB
LPA-1894-2024(O&M)
2024(O&M)
against the concerned respondents.
respondent . However, respondents under the influence
of the concerned local MLA lodged a false complaint against the appellants,,
which has resulted in issuing of charge sheets.
sheet .
3. Learned counsel submits that the learned Single Judge has failed to
take notice upon the facts of the case and the order of dismissal of writ
petition is, therefore,
therefore bad in law.
4. We have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for
the petitionerss.
5 It is a case where charge-sheets
charge under the Rules
Rules, issued to the
appellants after a preliminary inquiry has been conducted, wherein prima
facie allegations against the appellants were found to be made out
out, merely
erely
because appellants have not given any opportunity in th
the preliminary inquiry,
it cannot be said that issuance of charge sheets
sheets based on a preliminary inquiry
would be bad in law.
l The appellants shall get fair opportunity to contest the
allegations against them by filing reply to the charge sheet
sheets and if the charges
are found to be not made out or based on false allegations, they would have
opportunity to put up their defence accordingly.
accordingly.
6. In view of above, we are satisfied that the Single Judge has
rightly dismissed the writ petition at this stage. Further
Further, this Court
ourt finds that
the Single Judge has also taken note of the report filed by the appellants as
against the respondents and has directed the Director
Directorate of Higher Education
to take final decision on the complaint against the respondent
respondent, which also
does not warrant any interference. Accordingly, LPA is found to be
misconceived and is hereby dismissed.
dismi
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:139138-DB
LPA-1894-2024(O&M)
2024(O&M)
7. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any shall also stand
disposed of.
(SANJEEV
SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA
SHARMA)
JUDGE
(SANJAY VASHISTH)
JUDGE
October 23,, 2024
rashmi
1. Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No
2. Whether reportable? Yes/No
3 of 3
