JUDGEMENT
-
(1.)Leave granted.
(2.)The appellant Ran Singh was working as a Conductor in Haryana Roadways, one of the respondents herein. On 19-11-1991, he was detected to be taking some passengers in his bus without tickets. The plea of the appellant before the raiding party was that the bus was overcrowded and on that account, the passengers travelling without tickets could not be detected even though he had made rounds in the bus. Be that as it may, a departmental enquiry was started against the appellant wherein the appellant sent a letter to the General Manager, Haryana Roadways bargaining a plea. Therein he confessed to the fault and pleaded that he was prepared to accept any punishment provided he was retained in service and that he would not file even an appeal against such order. It is then that the General Manager awarded punishment of stoppage of two annual increments with cumulative effect and ordering suspension allowance to be limited to the extent already drawn by the appellant. Consequently, he was reinstated in service. Then followed a notice for suo motu alteration of punishment on account of inadequacy. On 29/3/1993, the appellant was dismissed from service not only on the basis of the aforementioned misconduct, but also on the basis of his previous record. Such step seemingly was taken in accordance with Rule 14 of the Haryana Civil Service (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1987. The appellant challenged that order of dismissal before the High court in writ jurisdiction, but unsuccessfully. Hence, this appeal.
(3.)Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having examined the plea bargaining made by the appellant, we think that in the facts and circumstances, action under Rule 14 of the Service Rule ibid, was not called for. The plea had been accepted by as high as the authority of the General Manager of the Haryana Roadways. The punishment already imposed on the appellant was not a small one but a major one and that too, without a formal enquiry. The General Manager, Haryana Roadways, could have nipped the whole affair in the bud by not encouraging the appellant making a bargaining plea. There is always some meeting of minds before such plea is put forth. Therefore, in the peculiar circumstances, the plea of the appellant need not entrap him in his guilt altering the highest punishment.
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.