Ishwar vs South Eastern Coalfields Limited

The challenge in the present Writ Petition is to the order dated 04/01/2018 â€" Annexure-P/1 whereby the services of the petitioner has been

placed under suspension. The challenge also is to the chargesheet issued against the petitioner dated 28/02/2018.

The contention of the counsel for the petitioner is that, the authorities issuing the order of suspension and chargesheet is not competent to issue the

same and since it is without the authority, both the orders deserve to be set-aside.

Perusal of record would show that the order of suspension dated 04/01/2018 has been passed by the Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Pendra

Road, Bilaspur and the chargesheet in the instant case seem to have been issued by the Tahsildar, Pendra Road, Bilaspur.

Perusal of record also show that the chargesheet has been issued to the delinquent employee the petitioner by the enquiry officer himself. It

appears that the chargesheet has not been issued by the disciplinary authority to the petitioner and the same has been straight away issued to him by

the enquiry officer.

The petitioner does not seem to have been provided with an opportunity to file reply to the chargesheet so as to convince the disciplinary authority

that the allegation levelled against him is not justified. That it is only in the event of the reply of the chargesheet being unsatisfactory is the requirement

for appointment of an enquiry officer. The said procedure seems to have not been complied with in the present Writ Petition.

So far as the order of suspension is concerned, the State counsel shows the provision of the land record manual wherein rule 10 of the said land

record manual shows that a Patwari can be placed under suspension by the S.D.O. and in the instant case, the suspension order has been issued by

the S.D.O. (Revenue) and the same therefore does not seem to be without authority or power and the order of suspension does not warrant any

interference.

However, so far as the issuance of chargesheet is concerned it appears that, the disciplinary authority has not issued the chargesheet and the same

has been for the first time issued to the petitioner by the enquiry officer himself which again is an illegal procedure adopted by the respondents and

which is not sustainable.

The very purpose of issuance of chargesheet is to seek explanation of the delinquent employee as to what is his contention in respect of the

allegation or complaint levelled against him. He is supposed to give the detailed reply to the chargesheet and only thereafter if the reply is found to be

unsatisfactory is the requirement for appointment of enquiry officer.

In the instant case, there does not appear to be any chargesheet issued by the disciplinary authority nor was the petitioner given an opportunity to

reply to the disciplinary authority.

For the said reason, the chargesheet issued to the petitioner dated 28/02/2018 being per-se illegal and it deserve to be and is accordingly set-

aside/quashed.

However, the liberty is reserved with the State Government/disciplinary authority to issue the charge sheet to the petitioner in its proper format and

under the appropriate rules governing the service condition of the petitioner and thereafter proceed with the enquiry, if necessary.

The Writ Petition accordingly stands partly allowed and disposed off.