Hon’ble Alok Singh, J (Oral).

1. Petitioner was working as Head Clerk with Haridwar Development Authority. Since none was working as Office Superintendent, therefore, the then Vice Chairman of Haridwar Development Authority vide order dated 28.02.1998 was pleased to give additional charge of Office Superintendent to the petitioner with the stipulation that he would not be paid any wages for discharging the additional duties and functions of Office Superintendent.

2. Undisputedly, there were some complaints against Harish Chandra Singh Rana, Assistant Engineer and Anand Ram Arya, Junior Engineer. The then Vice Chairman of Haridwar Development Authority directed the petitioner to lodge an FIR against Harish Chandra Singh Rana, Assistant Engineer and Anand Ram Arya, Junior Engineer. In compliance of directions issued by the Vice Chairman, petitioner got an FIR registered against both the persons. Sanction to prosecute them was declined by the State Government and thereafter, a show cause notice was issued against the petitioner asking him as to why action be not taken against him for lodging the FIR against Harish Chandra Singh Rana and Anand Ram Arya without obtaining prior sanction from the State Government, as required under Section 197 Cr.P.C. Petitioner submitted his reply to the effect that he got the FIR registered against both the Engineers in compliance of directions issued by the Vice Chairman. However, vide impugned order dated 11.10.2006, one censure entry was awarded to the petitioner for lodging the FIR against Harish Chandra Singh Rana and Anand Ram Arya without getting prior approval from the State Government and additional charge of Office Superintendent was taken from the petitioner. Feeling aggrieved, petitioner has approached this Court by way of filing present writ petition.

3. I have heard Mr. Rajendra Dobhal, Sr. Advocate assisted by Mr. Pratool Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner, Mr. Subhash Upadhyay, Standing Counsel for State of Uttarakhand and Ms. Puja Banga, Advocate for respondents no. 2 and 3 and have carefully perused the record.

4. Undisputedly, petitioner got registered an FIR against Harish Chandra Singh Rana, Assistant Engineer and Anand Ram Arya, Junior Engineer in compliance of the directions issued by the then Vice Chairman of Haridwar Development Authority.

5. I find force in the submissions of Mr. Rajendra Dobhal, Sr. Advocate for the petitioner, that it was the duty of the Vice Chairman to obtain prior sanction before getting the FIR registered against both Engineers and petitioner being Head Clerk or officiating Office Superintendent was not supposed to obtain prior approval of the State for getting the FIR registered.

6. Mr. Dobhal is right in saying that since petitioner got the FIR registered, as per directions of his senior officer, therefore, censure entry ought not to have been awarded to the petitioner. In case, petitioner would have refused to lodge the FIR pursuant to the directions issued by the Vice Chairman, then he would have been held guilty for insubordination, therefore, petitioner cannot be held guilty for lodging the FIR, on the directions of Vice Chairman. Moreover, there seems to be no need to obtain prior sanction before registration of FIR. Sanction can be obtained before the initiation of prosecution i.e. on or before cognizance is taken by the court on the police challani report. Therefore, censure entry awarded to the petitioner seems to be totally unjustified, arbitrary and does not sustain in the eyes of law.

7. Since petitioner was holding the post of Head Clerk and was never appointed as Office Superintendent, therefore, petitioner had no lien on the post of Office Superintendent, consequently, no direction should be issued to the respondents to restore the additional charge of office Superintendent. Moreover, as per Ms. Puja Banga, learned counsel for the Haridwar Development Authority, charge of Office Superintendent is not given to any offic