Subhash Chander Dalal vs State Of Haryana & Ors.

NIDHI GUPTA J. (Oral)

Prayer in the present writ petition is for issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, particularly a writ in the nature of Certiorari, quashing the impugned order dated 25.04.2025, bearing Memo No.3300-03 (Annexure P-3), passed by respondent No.2, whereby respondent No.2 has purported to withdraw and declare as “null and void” its own earlier reasoned order dated 11.04.2025, bearing Memo No.2978-79 (Annexure P-2), the impugned order being wholly without jurisdiction, illegal and unsustainable in law, inasmuch as the disciplinary authority has no power to review or recall its own concluded quasi-judicial order; further, for issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus or an appropriate declaration declaring the order dated 11.04.2025 (Annexure P-2) to be the operative and final order and, consequently, holding that the penalty of recovery of Rs.2,16,870/- along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum and withholding of two annual increments, imposed vide order dated 02.08.2024 (Annexure P-1), stands effaced and is unenforceable; and, in the alternative and without prejudice to the aforesaid reliefs, for issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing respondent No.1 to consider and decide the statutory departmental appeal preferred by the petitioner in October, 2025 (Annexure P-4), by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a time-bound period.

It is, inter alia, submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been working as a Clerk in the office of the Sub Divisional Officer, Animal Husbandry and Dairying Department, Sonepat, since the year 2017. A charge-sheet dated 07.01.2019 was issued to the petitioner alleging certain irregularities with regard to the collection and deposit of cattle parchi fee for the year 2017. Upon conclusion of the disciplinary proceedings, respondent No.2 passed an order dated 02.08.2024 (Annexure P-1), whereby the penalty of withholding two annual increments without cumulative effect was imposed upon the petitioner and recovery of the alleged financial loss caused to the Government, along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum, was also ordered. Thereafter, vide a reasoned order dated 11.04.2025 (Annexure P-2), the aforesaid order dated 02.08.2024 was withdrawn. However, subsequently, respondent No.2 passed the impugned order dated 25.04.2025 (Annexure P-3), whereby the earlier order dated 11.04.2025 was purportedly withdrawn and declared to be “null and void”. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that, in the absence of any statutory power of review, the same authority could not have reviewed, recalled or annulled its own concluded order. Learned counsel, however, submits that at this stage, the petitioner would be satisfied if the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the competent authority to consider and decide the statutory departmental appeal preferred by the petitioner against the impugned order dated 25.04.2025, in a time-bound manner.

Notice of motion.

Ms. Tanushree Gupta, learned Additional Advocate General, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State and submits that she has no objection in case a direction is issued to the competent authority to consider and decide the statutory appeal preferred by the petitioner within a stipulated period.

Heard.

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the claim raised by the petitioner and having regard to the limited relief sought, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the competent authority to consider and decide the statutory departmental appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 25.04.2025, by passing a speaking and reasoned order, in accordance with law, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

It is, however, made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the controversy or the entitlement of the petitioner to the relief claimed, and the competent authority shall take an independent decision strictly in accordance with law and the applicable rules and regulations.

Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.