05.04.2013 Views

VIGILANCE MANUAL VOLUME III - AP Online

VIGILANCE MANUAL VOLUME III - AP Online

VIGILANCE MANUAL VOLUME III - AP Online

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

DECISION - 276<br />

585<br />

Punishing authority under no obligation to pass a<br />

speaking order where it agrees with the findings of the<br />

Inquiry Officer and accepts the reasons given by him.<br />

Ram Kumar vs. State of Haryana,<br />

1987(5) SLR SC 265<br />

The appellant was a Bus Conductor of the Haryana<br />

Roadways. A charge was levelled against him that he did not issue<br />

tickets to nine passengers although he had taken the fare from them.<br />

A disciplinary proceedings was started and the Inquiry Officer held<br />

that the charge was proved. The punishing authority agreed with the<br />

findings of the Inquiry Officer and terminated his services.<br />

The appellant filed a suit challenging the legality of the order<br />

of termination contending that as no reason was given it was illegal<br />

and invalid being opposed to the principles of natural justice and the<br />

trial court dismissed the suit. On appeal, the Additional District Judge<br />

held that the order was a non-speaking order not containing any<br />

reason and as such it was invalid and allowed the appeal. The State<br />

of Haryana took the matter to the High Court which held that the<br />

impugned order was quite legal and valid. The High Court observed<br />

that the punishing authority has passed a lengthy order running into<br />

seven pages mentioning therein the contents of the charge-sheet,<br />

the detailed deposition of the witnesses, the explanation submitted<br />

by the appellant and the findings of the Inquiry Officer and concluding<br />

that no reason is available to him on the basis of which reliance may<br />

not be placed on the report of the Inquiry Officer.<br />

The Supreme Court observed that in view of the contents of<br />

the order, it is difficult to say that the punishing authority had not applied<br />

his mind to the case before terminating the services of the appellant.<br />

The punishing authority has placed reliance upon the report of the<br />

Inquiry Officer which means that he has not only agreed with the findings<br />

of the Inquiry Officer but also has accepted the reasons given by him<br />

for the findings. When the punishing authority agrees with the findings

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!