TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 1057X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d, the impugned order of removal from service is set aside. The petitioner would be deemed to be in service with all consequential benefits. The respondents, however, would be at liberty to take a decision with regard to the period of suspension and emoluments admissible to the petitioner, as per rules. - CWP No. 26051 of 2014 (O&M) - - - Dated:- 8-5-2017 - MR. JAISHREE THAKUR, J. For The Petitioner : Mr. DS Nigha, Advocate For The Respondents : Mr. RL Sharma, Advocate JAISHREE THAKUR, J. 1. A short question involved in the instant case is, whether order of termination of the petitioner dated 10.12.2014 (Annexure P/1), who was regularized as ALM on 7th August, 1987, can be upheld on the ground of his conviction under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, contends that there has been gross violation of the rules of natural justice in so far as the petitioner has been dismissed from service without holding regular inquiry. It is argued that the dispute was of private nature as it pertained to not honouring a cheque that was issued by the petitioner and as such the action of the petitioner does not amount to moral turpitude. The said offence would not reflect upon the work and conduct of the petitioner for such adverse action to be taken. 4. Per contra, Mr. R.L. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, contends that in the Punjab State Electricity Board Employee Punishment and Appeals Rules, a procedure has been pres ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ect of the relevant provisions is to ensure credibility to cheque transactions by making recovery of the cheque amount by payee of the cheque, easier. The trial Court failed to understand the aforesaid aspect and also failed to achieve the desired results. 7. Our own High Court in the case of Om Pal Versus State of Haryana and others 2015 (4) L.A.R. 452 held that termination of service on the ground of conviction under Section 138 of the Act is highly excessive not arising out of the offence of moral turpitude. 8. A perusal of the judgments, referred to above, would show that conviction under Section 138 of the Act, though having a criminal colour would be nothing else other than a dispute arising out civil transaction and an empl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... out holding a regular inquiry is no longer resintegra. While dealing with the issue of holding inquiry, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India and another Versus Tulsiram Patel, reported as AIR 1985 Supreme Court 1416, held as under:- 133. The second condition necessary for the valid application of clause (b) of the second proviso is that the disciplinary authority should record in writing its reason for its satisfaction that it was not reasonably practicable to hold the inquiry contemplated by Article 311 (2). This is a Constitutional obligation and if such reason is not recorded in writing, the order dispensing with the inquiry and the order of penalty following thereupon would both be void and unconstitutional. 134. It is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Board and others reported as 2007 (4) RSJ 780. 11. In the instant case, a perusal of the impugned order would show that dismissal from service is simplictor on the ground of conviction under Section 138 of the Act being upheld by this Court. Therefore, any adverse order passed without holding a regular inquiry, as envisaged under the Rules, is not sustainable and deserves to be set aside. 12. Consequently, the writ petition is allowed, the impugned order of removal from service is set aside. The petitioner would be deemed to be in service with all consequential benefits. The respondents, however, would be at liberty to take a decision with regard to the period of suspension and emoluments admissible to the petitioner, as per rules. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
