K K CHAUDHARI Vs. DISTRICT PANCHAYAT SURAT
LAWS(GJH)-2013-2-84
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
Decided on February 12,2013

K K Chaudhari Appellant
VERSUS
District Panchayat Surat Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.)Heard Mr. D.A. Bambhania, learned advocate for the petitioner, Ms. R.V. Acharya learned advocate for the respondent District Panchayat and Mr. Neeraj Soni, learned A.G.P. for the State. By this petition, challenge is made to the order dated 02.01.2002 passed by the Government, whereby the major punishment of reduction of pension to the extent of Rs. 345/- per month was imposed for 5 years against the petitioner, who was Extension Officer working with the respondent- District Panchayat, Surat.
(2.)Learned advocate for the petitioner stated that the petitioner had joined the service of the respondent-District Panchayat in the year 1963, initially as Gram Sevak. Thereafter in the year 1985, the petitioner was promoted on the post of Extension Officer (Panchayat). The petitioner retired on 30.11.1997 on attaining the age of superannuation. On the eve of retirement, the District Development Officer Surat issued charge-sheet to the petitioner alleging therein that, while in service the petitioner was also associated with one village level Milk Co-operative Society, (Ghantoli Group Dudh Utpadak Co-operative Mandali), which he could not do, in view of the conduct rules then prevailing. One Taluka Development Officer working under the Administrative Control of District Development Officer, Surat was appointed as an Inquiry Officer who held the charges to be proved and ultimately the impugned order came to be passed by the Government. It was held by the State Authorities that since the petitioner is getting Rs. 3450/- per month as pension, 10% thereof should be deemed proper punishment and that is how Rs. 335/- is reduced from his pension by way of penalty. Learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. D.A. Bambhania has contended that apart from that the fact, the very issuance of the charge-sheet was bad in the eyes of law on more than one counts, even before passing the impugned order by the Government, no notice whatsoever was issued, even after the so called finding recorded by the Inquiry Officer. It is contended that thus the impugned order is in gross violation of principal of natural justice as well, and the same be quashed and set aside.
(3.)On the other hand learned advocate Ms. R.V. Acharya representing District Panchayat Surat, as well as Mr. Soni, learned A.G.P. have supported the impugned order. In substance, it is contended by the respondent authorities that in view of the conduct Rules, the petitioner could not hold the post of President of village level co-operative unit and having done so, he had committed misconduct, which in the view of respondent authorities, was a gross misconduct so as to exercise powers by the authorities under Rule 189-A of the Bombay Civil Services Rules, 1959. It is contended that under these circumstances no interference be made by this Court.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.