PRASHANT NATVERLAL DESAI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT & 3 ORS
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
Prashant Natverlal Desai
State Of Gujarat And 3 Ors
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) By this writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner - a retired government servant has prayed for the following reliefs:
"8. The Honourable Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to the respondent authorities and may be pleased to:
(A) Quash and set aside the impugned punishment order dated 21.9.2015, AnnexureA to this petition, and
(B) Pending admission and final disposal of this petition the Honourable Court may be pleased to stay the operation, implementation and execution of the impugned punishment order dated 21.9.2015, and/ or
(C) Award the cost of this petition, and
(D) Grant any other relief or pass any other which the Honourable Court may consider as just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case."
(2.) The facts of this case may be summarized as under:
2.1 The petitioner was appointed as a direct recruit Assistant District Registrar (Gujarat Cooperative Service Class II) on 28th April, 1978. In the year 1985, he came to be promoted in the cadre of Gujarat Cooperative Service Class I, known as the District Registrar Cooperative Society, and was posted as the Deputy Registrar Cooperative Society (Administration).
2.2 The petitioner retired from the post of the Manager (Khadi) District Industries Centre, Jamnagar, on attaining the age of superannuation on 30th September, 2012.
2.3 While he was working as the Manager (Khadi), District Industries Centre, Jamnagar, he was served with a departmental chargesheet dated 16th March, 2002 for the alleged misconduct.
2.4 The complaint of misconduct was that while the petitioner was working as a Special Auditor (Milk), Milk Audit Office, Palanpur, he visited few places for the purpose of audit beyond his jurisdiction. He claimed T.A./D.A. for those visits.
2.5 At the end of the departmental inquiry, the charges were held to be established.
2.6 The disciplinary authority proposed a penalty of deduction of Rs.2500/ (Rupees Two Thousand Five Hundred only) per month from the pension of the petitioner for all times to come.
(3.) The State Government, in accordance with Rule 10 of the Gujarat Civil Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1973, consulted the Gujarat Public Service Commission in this regard. It appears that the Gujarat Public Service Commission suggested that the cut from the pension by way of penalty should be of Rs.6,000/ per month (Rupees Six Thousand only) for all times to come and not Rs.2500/ per month proposed by the State Government. Accordingly, a show cause notice was issued by the Deputy Secretary, Agriculture and Cooperation Department, Gandhinagar dated 22nd June, 2015 at Annexure: "J" to this petition (page - 71). In para 3 of the said show cause notice, it has been stated as under:
"In connection with the subject matter, why the amount of Rs.6,000/ should not be deducted from the amount of pension you are entitled to receive, as suggested by the Gujarat Public Service Commission".;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.