Shiv Kumar Sharma, J. - (1.) PUNISHMENT of dismissal from services was imposed on the petitioner vide order dated 28.1.1977 in a departmental inquiry initiated under Rule 16 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1958 (for short the CCA Rules). After unsuccessful appeal and review, the petitioner has approached this Court with the prayer to quash his dismissal order and seeking reinstatement in the services with all consequential reliefs.
(2.) CONTEXTUAL facts depict that the petitioner was appointed as LDC vide order dated 28.9.1961 and posted in the office of Sales Tax Officer Kota. He was promoted to the post of UDC oon ad hoc basis vide order dated 26.9.1975 and reverted to the post of LDC vide order dated 26.2.1976. The petitioner was placed under suspension and charge memo was served on him by the Commercial Taxes Officer Circle A Kota under Rule 16 CCA Rules on 14.4.1976. Since the appointing authority of the petitioner was Deputy Commissioner Commercial Taxes, Kota the charge sheet was served on him vide memo dated 1.10.1976. The petitioner averred that the respondents have neither allowed him to inspect the record nor supplied him the required documents. The petitioner was proceeded ex -parte and held the proceedings in utter haste and all the norms prescribed under the CCA Rules. and the principles of natural justice. The petitioner was denied the opportunity to file reply and even his defence nominee Pratap Lal Gurjar was not informed to appear before the enquiry officer despite his consent. Since the enquiry officer recorded the statements of the witnesses in a capricious manner, Pratap Lal Gurjar shown his inability to appear before the enquiry officer. The petitioner's further request to appoint Shri V.D. Pancholi as his defence nominee was not allowed on the purported ground that he was not a Government servant. The petitioner further averred that on the basis of vitiated enquiry proceedings the disciplinary authority issued a show cause notice dated 24.12.1976 along with the enquiry report stating therein that the disciplinary authority has tentatively decided to dismiss the petitioner from service but before taking proposed action, he was being given an opportunity to show cause. The petitioner submitted explanation in response to the show cause notice and stated that the FIR had been lodged against him under Sections 409, 467 & 471, IPC with the Police Station, Indragarh and the matter was pending in the Court concerned. The petitioner specifically averred before the disciplinary authority that he was denied reasonable opportunity to defend the case and the enquiry was conducted after grossly violating the principles of natural justice. The petitioner submitted that in these circumstances he should not be punished. The disciplinary authority ignoring the reply of the petitioner, passed the punishment order dated 28.1.1977 awarding the punishment of dismissal from service.
(3.) THE petitioner submitted appeal under Rule 23 of the CCA Rules to the Addl. Commissioner Commercial Taxes with a request to provide the opportunity of personal hearing. The Additional Commissioner instead of deciding the matter on merits passed the order dated 8.3.1979 rejecting the appeal by upholding the punishment order ignoring the defence and grounds raised in the appeal. Dis -satisfied with the order of the appellate authority the petitioner preferred another appeal to the Secretary to the Government under Rule 32 of the CCA Rules under the ill -advised but after lapse of more than four years the petitioner was informed vide letter dated 16.3.1983 that under the provisions of CCA Rules there was no provision for second appeal, however it was observed that if so advised, he could file review petition before the Governor of Rajasthan. In compliance to letter dated 16.3.1983 the petitioner filed review petition before the Governor of Rajasthan.;