Augustine George Masih, J. - (1.) BY this judgment, we propose to dispose of Civil Writ Petition Nos. 8102 of 2007 and C.W.P. No. 8133 of 2007 as common question of law and facts is involved therein. For the sake of convenience, facts are being taken from Civil Writ Petition No. 8102 of 2007.
(2.) THIS petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred by Nagesh Kumar who was working as a Conductor with Haryana Roadways, Jind for issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari to quash the order dated 24th April, 2007 (Annexure P -5), - - vide which his services have been terminated without affording him an opportunity to defend himself or holding any regular enquiry by invoking the provisions of Article 311(2) proviso (b) of the Constitution of India. Briefly stated the facts are that the Petitioner was appointed as Conductor on contractual basis on 17th June, 1994, i.e. during the period when the regular staff of the Transport Department was on strike. Thereafter, the Transport Department framed a policy according to which the services of the Petitioner were regularized on the post of Conductor, - - -vide letter dated 28th July, 2004 with effect from 20th August, 2000. In the petition, it is stated that the work and conduct of the Petitioner always remained satisfactory. It is submitted that the Petitioner and six other Conductors approached the Superintendent of the Office for regularization of their services, but he demanded an amount of Rs. 50,000 from them. Thereafter, on 3rd February, 2001, a formal complaint in an Open Darbar of the Chief Minister, Haryana was made against the Superintendent, Jogi Ram along with an affidavit stating therein that the Petitioner had given Rs. 50,000 on 20th April, 2000 along with other Conductors for their regularization. It has been further stated that the said Superintendent had also issued many threats to terminate their services if they did not complied with the said demand. Under these circumstances, these six Conductors had paid the amount for their regularization. On the basis thereof, the District Grievance Committee registered a case on 15th March, 2001 and after conducting an enquiry, a criminal case bearing F.I.R. No. 125 dated 28th March, 2001 under Sections 420/406 IPC was registered in Police Station Jind, against Jogi Ram, Superintendent. Jogi Ram was arrested on 20th April, 2001 and released on bail on 21st April, 2001.
(3.) A departmental enquiry was conducted against Jogi Ram, Superintendent. In the said enquiry, the Petitioner made statement, and also submitted an affidavit that the complaint dated 3rd February, 2001 was given due to some misunderstanding and stated that Jogi Ram, Superintendent had not taken any bribe from him. On the basis of the said statement and the affidavit given by the Petitioner and other Conductors, the Enquiry Officer held the charges levelled against Jogi Ram, Superintendent not proved and rather held that the allegations made by Pani Singh and Petitioner - -Nagesh Kumar were completely false. The Enquiry Officer further concluded that either they had made a false complaint and submitted a false affidavit or the statements made by them before the Enquiry Officer were false and baseless. He therefore recommended that strict action be taken against these employees.;