Judgment [Per: Hon'ble Mr. Justice J.C.S. Rawat, Chairman (Oral)]

1. This petition has been filed for seeking following relief:

"In view of the facts narrated here in above paragraphs the petitioner most respectfully prays for the following relief:

(a) That the order no.552/XXVIII-2-2011-49/2007 dated 12.07.2011 (Annexure No. A-1) by which the services of the petitioner have been terminated may be quashed and Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to grant all consequential benefits thereafter to treat the petitioner deemed to be continuing in service as if he was never suspended nor his services were ever terminated.

(b) That the Order No. 388/XXVIII-2-49/2007 dated 27.07.2007 (Anneuxre-A-12) may kindly be declared illegally passed on non-est.

(c) That the letter No. 97/Adhi./A.D.C./1/2011 dated 8.4.2011 (Annexure-A-25) passed by respondent No.6, Secretary Uttarakhand, Public Service Commission may be declared illegally passed and non-est.

(d) That a direction may kindly be issued to the Respondent No.1 to treat the petitioner as on duty after the petitioner had placed his joining vide his letter dated 28.6.2007 and 29.6.2007(Annexure-A-10 &A-11) as per provision of subsidiary Rule 110 of F.H.B. Vol. II and to grant all consequential benefits after the petitioner had placed his joining on duty before the respondent Nos. 4 & 5.

(e) That a further direction may also be issued to the respondent No.1 to sanction leave as per rule on the basis of Medical certificates countersigned by the respondent No.3 as Chairman of Divisional Medical Board for the period during which the petitioner could not attend to his duties because of illness."

2. The admitted facts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed on the post of Medical Officer by the State Government on 30.9.1992 and thereafter he was promoted on the post of Medical Officer, Senior Scale by the State Government on 21.5.2004. The petitioner remained on leave from 9.5.2006 to 28.5.2006 while he was posted in Haridwar. The said leave was taken on the ground of the illness of his mother. Thereafter, he again wanted to take leave due to his own illness and submitted his leave application but he was asked to appear before the Medical Board about his illness so that his leave may be granted. Immediately thereafter he appeared before the Medical Board and the Medical Board gave him a certificate that he was ill and his medical leave was countersigned by the authority. When he went to Haridwar to join on his post, the C.M.S., Haridwar did not allow him to join, so he gave his joining in the Medical Directorate, Dehradun. Thereafter, instead of giving him any posting, he was suspended by the respondents and a charge sheet was submitted to him.

3. The petitioner has alleged in his claim petition a number of grounds for assailing the order of the termination which has been passed after departmental enquiry. The petitioner has said the suspension order was bad in law; the charge sheet, which was prepared at the time of service of the suspension order, has not been served to the petitioner; the charge sheet, which has been served or later on prepared by the enquiry officer, was served upon the petitioner. He also alleged in his petition that the charge sheet has not been signed by the disciplinary authority and it has been signed by the enquiry officer, hence the charge sheet is void-ab-initio and it is not a charge sheet in the eyes of law.

4. The State has contested the petition and filed the C.A./W.S. on behalf of respondents. The respondents have stated that the charge sheet has been submitted with the prior approval of the disciplinary authority and Rule-7 of the Uttaranchal Government Servant (Discipline & Appeal) Rules 2003 provides that the disciplinary authority may himself or delegate the power to initiate the enquiry to any other person. Hence, the charge sheet, which has been submitted to the petitioner, is in accordance with law and there is no illegality in the charge sheet which has bee

Click Here to Read the rest of this document