10.09.2025 Date o Rakesh Kum h Kumar v. Ashok Khem Khemka and others
Case Details
COCP-4-202 2025 (O&M) -1- IN THE HI E HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND H ND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 220 COCP-4-2025 (O&M) COCP Date of Decision: 10.09.2025 Date o Rakesh Kum h Kumar .… Petitioner Versus Ashok Khem Khemka and others .... Respondents CORAM: H M: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDH NIDHI GUPTA Present: - Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Advocate vocate for the petitioner.
Legal Reasoning
Mr. Priyavrat Parashar, AAG, H AG, Haryana. NIDHI GUP I GUPTA, J. (ORAL) 1. Present contempt petition has b n of has been filed alleging violation of order dated dated 08.08.2023 (Annexure P-1) pass itled passed in CWP-27157-2019 titled as ‘Rakesh kesh Kumar vs. State of Haryana an r of and others’, whereby, order of recovery da ry dated 29.8.2019 passed against t ide; ainst the petitioner was set aside; keeping in v g in view the judgment of the Hon ivil Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. l No. 9417 of 2019 titled as M/s Daf td. Daffodills Pharmaceuticals Ltd. and another ther vs. State of U.P. and another, on her, 2019(12) JT 283, decided on 13.12.2019, 019,wherein it is held that ‘any or ity y order passed by the authority concerned c ed causes prejudice to an employee ty, oyee, especially financial liability, an opportun rtunity of hearing is must and no o an no order causing prejudice to an employee ca e can be passed by an employer u ee er unilaterally and the employee has to be be given opportunity to defend ny end himself/herself against any proposed ac d action which causes prejudice to th to the said employee’. 2. Learned counsel for the petition n of etitioner submits that in violation of the said dire id directions, the respondents have aga inst gain initiated an enquiry against RISHU KATARIA 2025.09.12 18:17 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. COCP-4-202 2025 (O&M) -2- the petitione titioner seeking refund of ₹2,72,240 per 2,240/- on the ground that as per Audit Party Party which had audited the re to he records w.e.f. 01.04.2017 to 31.03.2018, 2018, certain discrepancies were fou tax re found in the deposit of the tax collected am amounting to less deposit of the it of ₹21,61,581/-; of which the petitioner w ner was found to have deposited l . ited less amount of ₹₹2,72,240/-. Learned cou ed counsel submits that when the petit onal e petitioner was called for personal hearing on on 04.11.2024, the petitioner had the r had sought documents from the respondent dent-Authorities. The Enquiry Officer er to fficer told the concerned Officer to provide the s e the said documents to the petitioner; ents tioner; however, no such documents were given given to the petitioner. The petition the etitioner had even written to the Enquiry Off ry Officer vide letter dated 04.11.2024 vide 1.2024 (Annexure P-13) to provide the copies o pies of the documents. However, the and r, the same were not provided; and vide enquiry nquiry report dated 12.11.2024 (Anne has (Annexure P-16), the petitioner has been held lia eld liable to pay amount of ₹2,72,24 mits ,72,240/-. Learned counsel submits that thus, th us, the said enquiry report is in v ated s in violation of the order dated 08.08.2023 ( 2023 (Annexure P-1), inasmuch as, as, no charge-sheet has been filed against the t the petitioner; no opportunity to een ty to lead any evidence has been granted; and d; and no documents were provided to ded to the petitioner. 3. Per Contra, learned counsel for the sel for the respondents refers to the reply dated dated 15.05.2025 filed by way of af mar, of affidavit of Sh. Sushil Kumar, DTO-cum- -Secretary, Regional Transport Au mits Authority, Ambala and submits that in actua actual fact the enquiry report is dated , s dated 09.11.2024 (Annexure R-1), in which it is ch it is categorically recorded as follow follows:- “….Details of records/documen Kumar, Assistant Secretary:- “With reference to your office uments desired by Shri Rakesh ed ffice letter No. 54352/DTC, dated 0911/24 28.10.2024, you are r he re requested that I took over the RISHU KATARIA 2025.09.12 18:17 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. COCP-4-202 2025 (O&M) -3- charge of Cash Branch sea ict seat in the office of District Transport Officer and Secr ort Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Ambala on 17.05.2 he .05.2017. Please provide me the following documents for the sai e said inquiry:- 1. Photocopies of DCR of T he of TCP and DCR of office of the day on which TCP cash of Rs. ss Rs. 2,32,091/- was deposited less should be provided. 2. Who received the cash o sh sh on the day on which TCP cash was deposited less because apa nd e apart from me Mr. Gyan Chand TSI and Computer Operator w sh or were also present in the cash branch. 3. A copy of the order of T on of TCP employees on the day on which TCP cash was deposited ited less should be provided. 4. Copy of audit report.” Keeping in mind the req wo request made by the above two employees, by office letter ed tter No. 54776 / DTC, dated 04.11.2024, the District Tran ry, ransport Officer and Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, et rity, Ambala were directed to get the complete record related to id d to the case inspected by the said two employees on 05.11.2024 a rd 24 and provide the desired record to them. In addition, the Distr nd District Transport Officer and Secretary, Regional Transport so port Authority, Ambala were also directed that after providin id iding the record to the said employees, they should also he so send their comments to the e undersigned. In reference to t the above, ict the District Transport Officer and Secr ort Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Ambala vide their ed heir letter No. 2535/RTA, dated 06.11.2024, sent their comm as mments to the undersigned as follows:- “In reference to your o C, ur office letter No. 54776/DTC, dated 04.11.2024 on the above ove subject. The undersigned called S nt led Shri Rakesh Kumar, Assistant Secretary, Office of RTA, Farid d, Faridabad and Shri Gyan Chand, RISHU KATARIA 2025.09.12 18:17 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. COCP-4-202 2025 (O&M) -4- Transport Sub-Inspector (Ret he (Retired) to the office of the undersigned on 05.11.2024 to ts to provide the desired documents /records and showed them the r a the record of DCR and provided a copy of TCP (Internal Audit & or it & Inspection Interim Report for the financial Year 2017-2018) 8). 018) (01.04.2017 to 31.03.2018). Both of them refused to take the e the copy of DCR.” 4. It is submitted that accordingly t by dingly, all the documents sought by the petitione titioner were duly provided to him. 5. Ld. counsel for the petitioner the ioner still insists that copies of the documents ents have not been supplied to to to him, however, is unable to controvert th vert the averments made in the enquir e as enquiry report reproduced above as well as in th s in the aforesaid reply dated 15.05.2 5.05.2025 filed by the respondents. Even no rejo no rejoinder has been filed by the petiti e petitioner. 6. 7. Heard. Thus, in view of the facts notic tion noticed above, no further direction is required to ired to be passed; and the present petit nt petition stands dismissed. 8. 9. Rule stands discharged. Pending application(s), if any, s
Decision
any, shall also stand disposed of. 2025 10.09.2025 rishu ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned ned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No RISHU KATARIA 2025.09.12 18:17 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.