- (1.) The petitioner, who was serving as Associate Professor in Sociology, retired on 30.4.2012 upon attaining the age of superannuation.
(2.) Challenge in the instant petition is to the order dated 2.5.2016, Annexure P3, whereby one Shri RC Sharma, HCS (retired) has been appointed as an Enquiry Officer to hold a departmental enquiry under Rule 7 of the Haryana Civil Services (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1987 against the petitioner.
(3.) Learned senior counsel would submit that earlier in point of time on the same very charges the penalty of withholding of two increments with cumulative effect had been imposed vide order dated 8.7.2005. Such penalty had been affirmed by the Appellate and Revisional Authorities. The petitioner had preferred Civil Writ Petition No.2551 of 2008 assailing such action and the writ petition was allowed vide judgment dated 6.8.2015 at Annexure P1 and the order of penalty had been set aside by taking a view that the Disciplinary Authority/Punishing Authority could not have imposed such penalty without taking recourse to a regular enquiry. It is argued that just to wreak vengeance and without there being any application of mind, the impugned order dated 2.5.2016, Annexure P3, appointing an Enquiry Officer has been issued. Reliance has also been placed upon Rule 2.2 (b) of the Punjab Civil Services Rules, Vol.II, Chapter 2 (for short 'the Rules') as applicable to the State of Haryana to contend that the petitioner is a retired employee and the initiation of enquiry vide impugned order dated 2.5.2016 would be barred under such provision. Furthermore, learned senior counsel has even adverted to the specific article of charge drawn against the petitioner in the charge sheet. As per charge sheet, the petitioner was posted as Lecturer in Sociology in Government College, Bound Kalan from 8.7.1997 to 23.8.2001 and the Deputy Commissioner-cum-District Election Officer, Bhiwani had assigned to the petitioner the duties of a Returning Officer in the general elections of Gram Panchayat in the year 2000 at village Barsi Jattan, District Bhiwani to oversee the filing of nomination papers for election of Panch/Sarpanch. Nomination papers were to be filed from 26.2.2000 to 28.2.2000. From ward No.11 only one nomination paper in the name of Shri Mauji Ram was filed upto 28.2.2000 i.e. the last date of filing of nomination papers. The act of omission and commission levelled against the petitioner is that he had instead declared one Shri Mange Ram son of Nand Ram of Ward No.11 as elected Panch and pursuant thereto, on the basis of a patently wrong declaration made by the petitioner, wrong notification regarding Panch of Ward No.11 was issued. Argument raised is that such act of omission and commission as alleged cannot be construed as mis-conduct so as to justify the initiation of departmental proceedings and appointment of an Enquiry Officer vide impugned order dated 2.5.2016. In support of such contention, reliance has been placed upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Inspector Prem Chand v. Inspector Prem Chand v. Government Government of NCT of Delhi and others, 2007 4 SCC 566.;