The central legal point established is that a Borrowing Department lacks authority to initiate departmental enquiry and impose punishment on an employee after repatriation to the Parent Department, as per Rule 20 of the Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules 1966 and relevant legal precedents.

ORDER :

1. The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition praying for the following reliefs:

“1. That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a appropriate Writ quashing Annexure P/6 & P/23 being patently illegal arbitrary and capricious and Violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

2. That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call the entire records of the case from the Respondents.

3. That Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate Order/direction commanding the Respondents to compensate the Petitioner for the mental agonies caused to him by their detrimental action.

4. Any other relief, which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper, may also be passed in favour of the petitioner together with cost of the petition.”

2. Brief facts of the case, as projected by the petitioner, are that the petitioner was initially appointed as Assistant Treasury Officer in the District Treasury, Mahasamund vide order dated 07.02.2005. Subsequently, vide order dated 20.06.2006, the petitioner was sent on deputation in the Panchyat and Rural Development Department as Assistant Accounts Officer. Thereafter on 14.07.2012, the petitioner was repatriated back to his Parent Department (Finance Department). In consonance with the Order Dated 14.07.2012, the Borrower Department vide order dated 30.07.2012 relieved the Petitioner with an instruction to immediately joined at the new place of posting. The Petitioner immediately on 31.07.2012 joined the Service of his Parent Department in the Office of Senior Treasury Officer, District Treasury, Bilaspur (C.G) as ‘Assistant Treasury Officer’ and since then he was continuously working there. Subsequently, a Chargesheet Dated 10.12.2012 was communicated to the Petitioner on 02.01.2013 with regard to the alleged irregularities conducted by him while working in the Borrowing Department. The petitioner replied the same vide his reply dated 10.01.2013. Vide Memo Dated 19.12.2013, Petitioner was called for in the hearing of Departmental Enquiry on 23.01.2014 by the Enquiry Officer who is Respondent No 2. In retaliation to the Memo dated 19.12.2013, Petitioner’s Counsel served upon the Respondent No. 2 a Legal Notice Dated 04.01.2014. On 21.04.2014, the Petitioner with an ultimate hope communicated his precarious condition to the Respondent. No 2 i.e., the Borrower Department in nexus to the Arbitrary and Capricious Action. Vide memo Dated 30.04.2014, Respondent No. 2 again called for the Petitioner to invariably present on the date of hearing. In reciprocation of the same, the Petitioner replied to the Respondent No. 2 vide his correspondence dated 17.05.2014. Vide memo Dated 16.05.2014. Respondent No. 2 again called for the Petitioner to invariably present on the date of hearing. In reciprocation of the same, Petitioner replied to the Respondent No. 2 Vide his correspondence Dated 28.05.2014. On 06.06.2014, Respondent No. 2 again called for the Petitioner for appearance in the hearing of Departmental Enquiry. On 10.06.2014, Respondent No. 2 communicated a missive to the Respondent No. 1. Vide Legal Notice Dated 19.06.2014, Respondent No. 2 was categorically informed that “Finance & Account Department is the Parent Department of the My Client and for this very reason Panchyat and Gramin Vikash Department has no authority to initiate any Disciplinary Action against My Client. Vide Memo Dated 01/07/2014, Respondent No. 2 sought direction from the Respondent No. 1. Vide Memo Dated 25/02/2015, Respondent No. 2 again called for the Petitioner to invariably present on the date of hearing on 09/03/2015. In reciprocation of the same, Petitioner categorically apprised the Respondent No. 2 in nexus to the Provision of Rule 14(20) of the Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules 1966. Vide Memo Dated 31/03/2015, Respondent No. 2 again called for the Petitioner for recording plea on 06.04.2015. In retaliation of the same, Petitioner replied to the R