Dharmendra Kaushik (D.K.Kaushik) vs Madhya Pradesh Madhya Kshetra Vidyut Vitaran Co.Ltd. Thr.

Heard finally through Video Conferencing.

This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed seeking the following relief:-

“i) That, the order impugned dated 11.03.2020 (Annexure â€" P/1) may kindly be quashed with all consequential effects, in the interest of justice.

ii) That, the respondents be further commanded to decide the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the penalty order Annexure- P/1.

iii) That, any other relief which is suitable in the facts and circumstances of the case in favour of the petitioner including the costs throughout may also

be granted.â€​

This Court in the case of Dharmendra Kaushik (D.K.Kaushik) Vs. Madhya Pradesh Madhya Kshetra Vidyut Vitaran Co. Ltd.Â

Passed in W.P.No.37/2020 by order dated 17/01/2020 has held as under:-

“This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed against the order dt.24.10.2019 passed by the respondent No.2, by which

the minor punishment of stoppage of one increment without cumulative effect has been imposed and a recovery of Rs.75,280/- has been directed.

It is fairly conceded by the counsel for the petitioner that the order under challenge is an appealable order. However, by relying upon the judgment

passed by the Supreme Court in the case of O.K.Bharadwaj Vs. Union of India and others reported in (2001) 9 SCC 180, it is submitted that when the

allegations are disputed by the delinquent officer, then minor punishment can not be imposed without conducting departmental inquiry. To buttress his

contentions, learned counsel for the petitioner has also relied upon an order dt.19.06.2018 passed by this Court in the case of Dharmendra Kaushik

(D.K.Kaushik) Vs. Madhya Pradesh Madhya Kshetra Vidyut Vitaran Co. Ltd. (W.P.No.9310/2018).

Considered the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner. Petitioner can very well raise the submission that before imposing the minor

punishment of stoppage of one increment, the respondents are under an obligation to conduct an inquiry in the light of the judgment passed by the

Supreme Court in the case of O.K.Bharadwaj (supra).

Accordingly, this petition is disposed of with the liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal with the aforesaid ground. It is made clear that in case, if the

aforesaid ground is raised, then the respondents shall be under an obligation to deal with the said ground specifically. In case, if the appeal is filed

within a period of seven days from today, then the respondents shall consider the same without adhering to the question of limitation and the appeal be

decided by passing a speaking order within a period of two months from the date of filing of the appeal.â€​

Accordingly, this petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner that in case if he files an appeal within a period of seven days, then without

adhering to the question of limitation, the same shall be decided in accordance with directions given by this Court in the case of Dharmendra Kaushik

(supra) in W.P.No.37/2020.