- (1.) Challenge, in the present Letters Patent Appeal, is to the judgment of the learned Single Judge, dated 21.3.2007, dismissing the writ petition of the appellant.
(2.) The appellant was appointed as a Taxation Inspector in the Department of Excise and Taxation, Haryana on 30.6.2000. He was already serving in the PEC Limited at New Delhi. He submitted his resignation from the aforesaid company on 7.7.2000 and sought extension of time to join the new post. Three months' time was granted to the appellant to join the said post. Eventually, the appellant joined on 4.10.2000 and then left on 6.10.2000 after two days. Thereafter, a notice was served upon him questioning him about his absence. He was, however, permitted to join his duties as Taxation Inspector, subject, however, to his services being terminated, without any notice, in case it was found that he had served in any other Govt./Semi Government Department or private firms in any capacity during the period from 6.10.2000 to 11.1.2001 i.e. the period of his absence from duty. The Department thereafter received information that during the period of his absence, the appellant continued to work with the PEC Limited at New Delhi and drew salary. He was charge-sheeted and after holding an inquiry, a show-cause notice was issued to him. Thereafter, his services were terminated.
(3.) The appellant impugned the order of his termination, inter alia pleading that the inquiry proceedings were violative of Rule 7.2 of the Haryana Civil Services (Punishment and appeal) Rules, 1987, as the appellant had not been granted an opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses, thus, resulting in prejudice to him.;