JUDGEMENT
-
(1.)Feeling aggrieved against the impugned orders dated 20.7.2011 (Annexure P-3) and 5.10.2011 (Annexure P-5) passed by the Commissioner, Faridkot Division, Faridkot, petitioner has approached this Court, by way of instant writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ in the nature of Certiorari, for quashing the abovesaid impugned orders. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was proceeded against ex parte vide impugned order dated 20.7.2011 (Annexure P-3), on the basis of factually incorrect service report made by Kulbir Singh, Peon and Ajmer Singh, Chowkidar. He further submits that when the petitioner moved the application for setting aside the order dated 20.7.2011, his application was also dismissed by the Commissioner, Faridkot Division, Faridkot vide order dated 5.10.2011 (Annexure P-5), proceeding on a wholly misconceived and erroneous approach. He next contended that on the application moved by the petitioner, inquiry was got conducted by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Jaitu, who submitted his inquiry report dated 21.11.2011 (Annexure P-6), wherein the allegations levelled by the petitioner, were found to be factually correct. Finally, he prays for allowing the writ petition by setting aside the impugned orders.
(2.)Faced with the above said situation, learned counsel for the State could not deny this factual aspect of the matter, it being a matter of record.
(3.)Having heard the learned counsel for the parties at considerable length, after careful perusal of the record of the case and giving thoughtful consideration to contentions raised, this Court is of the considered opinion that in the given fact situation, the present writ petition deserves to the allowed. To say so, reasons are more than one, which are being recorded hereinafter.
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.