The State Of Rajasthan vs Amar Lal S/O Shri Ram Lal ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 4 Raj/2

Rajasthan High Court

The State Of Rajasthan vs Amar Lal S/O Shri Ram Lal ... on 2 January, 2024

Bench: Manindra Mohan Shrivastava, Praveer Bhatnagar

   [2024:RJ-JP:175-DB]

           HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                       BENCH AT JAIPUR

               D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 267/2021
                                              In
                    S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.5323/1997
   1.       The    State      Of     Rajasthan,          Through       The   Divisional
            Commissioner, Kota
   2.       The Collector, Sawai Madhopur
   3.       Tehsildar, Sawai Madhopur
                                                                        ----Appellants
                                          Versus
   Amar Lal S/o Shri Ram Lal, Resident Of In Front Of Lodha Petrol
   Pump, Bazaria, Sawai Madhopur, Rajasthan
                                                                       ----Respondent

For Appellant(s) : Ms. Archana Advocate on behalf of Mr. Anil Mehta, Additional Advocate General.

HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR Judgment

02/01/2024

1. Heard on appeal.

2. The appeal is delayed by 769 days.

3. Learned State counsel would submit that in view of order of

the Hon'ble Supreme Court passed in the case of in RE:

Cognizance for Extension of Limitation (Miscellaneous

Application No.21/2022 filed in Miscellaneous Application

No.665/2021 in Suo Motu Writ Petition (C) No.3/2020, the

period from 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022 is to be excluded for the

purpose of limitation.

4. Even if that period is excluded, we hardly find any ground to

condone the delay because the impugned order was passed way

back on 27.11.2018, i.e., much before on set of COVID-19

[2024:RJ-JP:175-DB] (2 of 2) [SAW-267/2021]

pandemic. There is hardly any explanation as to what steps were

taken and why appeal could not be filed upto March, 2020.

5. Even otherwise, we find that the disciplinary action has been

held illegal on the ground of complete violation of principles of

natural justice inasmuch as the respondents have failed to place

any material before the Court that the Enquiry Officer sent

notices, which were received and duly acknowledged by the

delinquent employee. There is no document on record along with

reply of respondents with regard to service of notice on the

delinquent employee during the course of enquiry. The notices

which have been placed on record are subsequent to submission

of enquiry report and not before that.

6. In view of the above, no case for interference is made out.

7. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.

(PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),ACTING CJ

SANJAY KUMAWAT-64

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)