AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Pankaj Purohit, J
By means of this writ petition, petitioner has challenged the order dated 10.07.2023 issued on 29.11.2023 (Annexure No.1 to the writ petition).
The impugned order dated 10.07.2023 was passed in two orders. By first order, the respondent no.2-District Magistrate, Nainital has granted permission to lodge first information report against the petitioner for embezzlement of government money total of Rs. 42,29,262/- and by second order dated 10.07.2023, recovery of aforesaid amount was directed to be made from the petitioner by a regular deduction of Rs.20,000/- per month from his monthly salary.
The petitioner was posted as Naib-Nazir in Tehsil Haldwani, District Nainital during the relevant period, when he was chargesheeted on a complaint regarding embezzlement of government money was made against him. He was chargesheeted by the Disciplinary Authority/District Magistrate, Nainital on 24.08.2017. Before that he was placed under suspension vide order dated 14.07.2017 and the Inquiry Officer was also appointed by the said suspension order.
After conclusion of the departmental proceedings, the petitioner was inflicted with a minor punishment as described under Rule 3(iii) of the Uttarakhand Government Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 2003, as amended up to date, of recovery from pay of the whole or part of any pecuniary loss caused to Government by negligence or breach of orders.
It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the disciplinary inquiry has not been conducted in a proper manner alleging that no proper opportunity was afforded to the petitioner. Under Rule 11 of the aforesaid Rules, the petitioner has got a remedy of statutory appeal provided against the infliction of punishment of minor penalty, and the appeal can be filed before the next immediate officer of the petitioner.
The petitioner approached before this Court straightway bypassing the said statutory appeal prescribed under Rule 11 of the aforesaid Disciplinary Rules, 2003. The petitioner is, therefore, relegated to file the appeal before the Appellate Authority.
Since, the direction/permission to lodge first information report against the petitioner is fall out of the aforesaid inquiry and serious charges are imputed against the petitioner of embezzlement of the government money, this Court does not find it appropriate to interfere in the matter. However, the said aspect of the matter may also be looked into by the Appellate Authority.
Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to file the appeal against the order dated 10.07.2023, which was served upon him on 29.11.2023, within a period of 15 days from the date of production of certified copy of this order.
Till then, the order dated 10.07.2023 shall remain stayed with respect to lodging of the first information report against the petitioner.
Writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of.