Mahesh Chand Pareek vs State of Rajasthan And Ors

The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the charge-sheet dated 19.09.2006 issued under Rule 16 of the Rajasthan Civil

Services (CCA) Rules, 1958, the order of termination dated 23.02.2011 (penalty order) and further rejection of appeal by the Appellate Authority vide

order dated 30.09.2011.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the allegation against the petitioner was in respect of his working as District Probation & Social

Welfare Officer at Alwar from 16.06.1990 to 09.09.1992 and from 10.10.1992 to 24.04.1994 and further working of the petitioner from 26.06.1994 to

11.07.1994.

Learned counsel submitted that the allegation was in respect of some financial irregularities and alleged embezzlement in respect of certain distribution

of scholarship to SC/ST candidates.

Learned counsel submitted that the co-delinquent namely Ramesh Chand Meena was also visited with the penalty of termination from service by

order dated 23.02.2011 and appeal was also rejected vide order dated 20.07.2011. The co-delinquent had preferred S.B. Civil Writ Petition

No.11284/2011 titled as (Ramesh Chand Meena vs. State of Rajasthan and Anr.) and the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 16.11.2018,

allowed the writ petition and set aside the impugned order of termination and rejection of appeal. The operative portion of the said order dated

16.11.2018 is reproduced hereasunder :-

Keeping in view the above findings, the natural corollary is that the orders impugned dated 23.2.2011 and 20.7.2011 stand quashed and set aside

with all consequential benefits.

The writ petition is accordingly allowed. No costs.

Learned counsel further submitted that the other co-

delinquent with the petitioner, namely Prahlad Meena and Smt.Chandra Bala Arya also approached this Court by filing S.B. Civil Writ Petition

No.12482/2012 (Prahlad Meena vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr.) and S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.13888/2011 (Smt. Chandra Bala Arya vs. The State

of Rajasthan & Ors.) respectively.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 21.08.2019, allowed both the writ petitions and

followed the judgment in the case of Ramesh Chand Meena (supra).

Learned counsel submitted that on the same set of charges, the petitioner was also terminated from service and as such, the controversy is no more

res-integra in the present petition. The order passed by the Coordinate Bench in the case of Prahlad Meena (supra) and Smt.Chandra Bala Arya

(supra) is quoted hereasunder :-

Learned Additional Advocate General Mr.Ganesh Meena appearing for respondents is not in a position to controvert the aforesaid fact. After hearing

learned counsel for the parties on the limited count of applicability of judgment passed by this Court in the matter of Ramesh Chand Meena (supra),

this Court is of the opinion that the Disciplinary Authority who has passed similar orders for same set of charges against three is a fact which is

reflected from the record itself.

In the light of the aforesaid observations, the orders impugned dated 23.02.2011 and 20.07.2011 stand quashed and set aside with all consequential

benefits. The writ petitions are allowed.

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the petitioner was placed under suspension w.e.f. 06.11.1996 and he continued to be under

suspension till his superannuation in the year 2011 and as such, the respondents are required to consider the grant of benefit to the petitioner for the

suspension period as well.

This Court on 22.07.2020 directed learned counsel for the respondents to look into the orders passed in the cases of Ramesh Chand Meena (supra)

and Prahlad Meena (supra), which have already been passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court.

Learned AAG Mr.Ganesh Meena fairly submits that the other co-delinquent have already been granted benefit in pursuance of the orders, passed by

this Court while deciding the controversy.

This Court accordingly finds that the petitioner, against whom identical allegations were levelled, as compared to the other delinquent, needs to be

treated similarly.

This Court further finds that the orders passed by the Coordinate Bench in the case of Ramesh Chand Meena (supra), Prahlad Meena (supra) and

Smt.Chandra Bala Arya (supra) have already been followed by the respondents and the orders have also been implemented in their cases.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, at this juncture, submits that since the petitioner has already been retired, consequential benefits may also be

conferred.

Accordingly, this Court allows the present writ petition and set aside the penalty order of termination dated 23.02.2011 and the order passed by the

Appellate Authority dated 30.09.2011.

Since, the orders dated 23.02.2011 and 30.09.2011 are quashed by this Court, consequential orders, resulting from quashing of these orders, will be

passed by the respondents and post retiral benefits, which are admissible to the petitioner, will also be conferred in his favour. The respondents will

also consider the period of suspension, on the basis of orders, which have been set aside by this Court.

The compliance of this order be made within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.