Dhirubhai Naranbhai Patel, J. - (1.) THIS Letters Patent Appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order delivered by the learned Single Judge in W.P(S) No. 704 of 2003 dated 18th April, 2013 whereby, the petition preferred by this appellant has been dismissed by the learned Single Judge and the punishment of dismissal was upheld. Against this judgment and order the original petitioner has preferred this Letters Patent Appeal.
(2.) COUNSEL for the appellant submitted that for the so called alleged misconduct a criminal case was also instituted and in the criminal case there was honorable acquittal passed by the appellate court. This aspect of the matter has not been properly appreciated by the learned Single Judge and wrongly there are few observations in paragraph No. 6 of the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge. In fact the outcome in the criminal matter was already on record in the writ petition and the order of honorable acquittal was also annexed with the writ petition filed by the original petitioner. It is further submitted by the counsel for the appellant (original petitioner) that once there is honorable acquittal by the criminal court this appellant cannot be punished in the departmental proceedings for the same charge. It is further submitted by the counsel for the appellant that the enquiry report was never supplied to this original petitioner. This aspect of the matter has also not been properly appreciated by the learned Single Judge and hence, the judgment and order delivered by the learned Single Judge deserves to be quashed and set aside.
(3.) COUNSEL appearing for the respondent -State submitted that it is true that there is acquittal passed in the criminal matter, but, there is conviction order passed by the trial court. Even if there is acquittal there can be second departmental proceeding and if the charges are proved in the departmental proceeding adequate punishment can also be imposed upon the delinquent. It is further submitted that in the facts of the present case the charges are at Annexure -2, which are of theft. In a criminal proceeding there is acquittal because the witnesses have turned hostile. So far as the disciplinary proceedings are concerned enquiry was conducted, witnesses were examined, charges levelled against the delinquent were proved and he was awarded punishment of dismissal against which appeal was also preferred and the departmental appeal was also dismissed. This aspect of the matter has been properly appreciated by the learned Single Judge. It is also submitted by the counsel for the respondent -State that looking to the nature of misconduct the punishment is not shockingly disproportionate on the contrary, the punishment is in commensurate with the nature of misconduct and hence, this Letters Patent Appeal may not be entertained by this Court.;