Mohd. Fayaz vs State of Jammu & Kashmir and Others

Mansoor Ahmad Mir, J.—Petitioner has called in question Order No. 244-DRD of 1998 dated 13.11.1998 (annexure ""C"") passed by

respondent No. 2, whereby and where under the rank of petitioner as Village Level Worker came to be reduced to the rank of Plantation Watcher

on the grounds taken in the writ petition.

It is necessary to give brief resume of the case, the womb of which has given birth to the instant petition.

It appears that a complaint came to be made before the respondents against the petitioner by one Mohd. Hanif son of Raj Mohd., resident of

Dana, Fatehpur, came to be referred to the Superintendent of Police, Poonch for inquiry, who conducted the inquiry and submitted report to the

Vigilance Commissioner. The Vigilance Commissioner accordingly recommended action against the petitioner and the respondents placed the

petitioner under suspension vide Order No. 65-DRD of 1997 dated 5.3.1997. Respondent No. 2 initiated the inquiry proceedings against the

petitioner after framing charges against him. The petitioner submitted reply and denied the charges. It appears that thereafter without conducting full

fledged inquiry and without recording the evidence of complainant or petitioner the final inquiry report came to be passed. Thereafter notice was

issued to the petitioner to show cause why major punishment be not inflicted upon him and accordingly the impugned order came to be passed.

Respondents have filed the counter and have resisted the petition. Petitioner has also filed the rejoinder.

There is nothing on the file suggesting the fact that the inquiry was conducted and petitioner was given opportunity to examine or cross examine

the witnesses or even the complainant. Even the inquiry officer has not recorded the statement of complainant. It appears that the impugned order

came to be passed in breach of principles of natural justice and without conducting full fledged inquiry. Learned Counsel for respondents when was

asked to show whether full fledged inquiry was conducted, she was not in a position to produce the record which would have indicated that any

such inquiry was conducted. However, she has produced the record showing some noting of officers as well as clerical staff and inquiry report

which was prepared on 11.12.1997 which indicates that no regular inquiry was conducted. It appears that petitioner had filed an application/laid

motion before the higher authorities, whereby he had mentioned that he was not heard before conducting the inquiry. Accordingly the Deputy

Commissioner, Poonch directed the Additional Deputy Commissioner to conduct inquiry, who after conducting the same submitted the report on

8.7.2007 vide No.Agr/118-19/ADC. It is reported that petitioner has been condemned unheard and he has been wrongly punished. Further it is

recorded in the report that complainant is itself under cloud as he has no ostensible means of livelihood and is known for blackmailing the officials.

It is apt to reproduce last two para herein:

For the forgoing reasons, I find that the complaint against the accused official was false, fabricated and made with the criminal intent to wreck

vengeance on the accused official. The character and conduct of the complainant is itself under cloud as he has no ostensible means of livelihood

and is known for such pursuits of blackmailing the officials. Unfortunately a great injustice has been done to the official by inflicting upon him one of

the major punishments of reduction in rank, which is highly arbitrarily, unjustified in view of the facts revealed during the course of enquiry. It is as

such recommended that the impugned order of punishment may kindly be got withdrawn/revoked in the interest of justice, so as to indemnify the

irreparable loss caused to the official and his family.

In the given circumstances, I deem it proper to allow the writ petition and quash the impugned order. It is ordered accordingly. However,

respondents are at liberty to conduct the inquiry afresh if they choose so. If the inquiry is conducted, the period of suspension and the arrears of

pay, increment etc., to which the petitioner is otherwise entitled to, is kept subject to the outcome of such inquiry. In case inquiry is not conducted,

in that eventuality all the arrears of pay along with increments, to which the petitioner is entitled to, shall be released in his favour. Disposed of along

with all CMPs.

Registry is directed to return the record to Mrs. Mahajan, learned Counsel for respondents 1 & 2 against proper receipt.