ORDER :

1. The petitioner has filed the present petition challenging the order dated 27.05.2015 (Annexure P/1) by which the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the punishment order 30.06.2014 (Annexure P/2) by which the petitioner’s salary has been reduced to the lowest stage of the pay band in Basic 18,600/- + Grade Pay 6600/- for three years. The annual increment for three years was also withheld with cumulative effects.

2. Brief facts as projected by the petitioner are that the petitioner was served with a charge-sheet dated 20/9/2011 (Annexure P/3) alleging that while he was posted as Deputy Collector, Raigarh between October, 2004 to June, 2007 in that period between 15/10/2004 to 28/4/2006 he was In-charge of Nazul Office, Raigarh and committed gross negligence in discharging his duty of Nazul Officer in revenue case No. 31/A-4/04-05 and acted in contravention of the procedure prescribed in Section 4 (1) of the Revenue Book Circular (hereinafter referred as ‘RBC’) and thus committed misconduct.

3. The following charges were leveled against him:

vkjksi

vki fnukad 15-10-2004 ls twu 2007 rd fMIVh dysDVj] jk;xढ+ esa inLFk Fks rRle; fnukad 15-10-2004 ls 28-04-2006 rd utwy vf/kdkjh] jk;xढ+ ds ÁHkkj ij jgsA mDr vof/k esa vkius utwy Hkwfe dk dj fu/kkZj.k gsrq vkosnu i= vkosnd bUæiky flag HkkfV;k ls lh/ks ÁkIr dj vf/kdkj {ks= ls ckgj tkdj jktLo Ádj.k Øekad 31@v&4@04&05 esa jktLo iqLrd ifji= [k.M 4 Øekad&1 esa fn;s x;s Áko/kkuksa ds foijhr dk;Zokgh dh xbZA

bl Ádkj vkidk mDr d`R; NŒxŒ flfoy lsok ¼vkpj.k½ fu;e 1965 ds fu;e 3¼1½ ¼,d½ ¼nks½ ,oa ¼rhu½ rFkk jktLo iqLrd ifji= [k.M&pkj&1 ds foijhr gSA ifj.kkeLo:i vkius Lo;a dks NRrhlxढ+ flfoy lsok ¼oxhZdj.k] fu;a=.k rFkk vihy½ fu;e] 1966 ds fu;e&14 ds v/khu vuq'kklukRed dk;Zokgh dk Hkkxh cuk fy;k gSA

4. The petitioner before submitting reply to the charge-sheet has sought relevant documents vide his applications dated 03.10.2011 and 23.01.2012 for providing the documents as mentioned in the charge sheet as well as documents namely the Government instruction prohibiting the Nazul Officer to accept application for fixation of tax regarding Nazul Land, copy of memo dated 25.01.1969, and thereafter any order issued by the State Government on the basis of which a sale-deed can be declared to be null and void. If tax assessment proceedings conducted by the petitioner is held to be null and void in any court proceedings, copy of the same be also provided. It has also been contended that the documents are relevant to defend his case and in absence of non supply of documents his right to defend will be adversely prejudiced. It has also been mentioned that in absence of relevant documents, the delinquent officer cannot take defence property as such all the documents sought by the petitioner may be supplied to him.

5. The respondent without supplying these documents has initiated the departmental proceedings and accordingly Additional Commissioner, Bilaspur was appointed as Enquiry Officer and Additional Collector, Raigarh was appointed as Presenting Officer.

6. The respondent, to prove the charges leveled against the petitioner has examined Mahesh Patel, the then Revenue Inspector as PW-1, Girish Kumar Verma the then Revenue Inspector, Raigarh as PW-2, Smt. Shakuntala Thawait Assistant Grade III as PW-3 but her statement could notbe completed as she expired on 06.03.2011, J.R. Nikunj the then Superitendent Land Record (Nazul) as PW-4. The petitioner to prove his innocence has moved an application on 19.11.2012 to examine R.S. Vishwakarma the then Collector, Raigarh DW-1, Thakur Ram Singh, Collector as DW-2, Manish Kumar Tyagi the then Collector Raigarh as DW-3, Shri Ashok Agrawal, the then Collector Raigarh as DW-4, R.P. Jain, Commissioner Bilaspur as DW-5, Smt. Nidhi Chibbar, Secretary G.A.D. as DW-6, S.L. Ratre, the then Additional Collector, Raigarh as DW-7, S.N. Ekka Additional Collector, Raigarh as DW-8, Abhay Kumar Mishra, Joint Collector, Raigarh as DW-9, A.K. Gritlahre, the then Deputy Collec