Pet it ioner v. St at e of Ut t arakhand And Anot her

I n t his Writ Pet it ion, t he pet it ioner has challenged t he order dat ed 17.03.2025, by which respondent no. 1 was not sat isfied wit h t he inquiry conduct ed against t he pet it ioner, and has direct ed reinquiry against him . A perusal of t he order im pugned would reveal t hat respondent no. 1 was of t he view, t hat in view of t he revenue int erest , t he m at t er is required t o be re- inquired, wit h respect t o t he charge- sheet dat ed

21.08.2023 issued t o t he pet it ioner. 1

3. The cont ent ion of t he learned counsel t he pet it ioner, t hat t hat t he inquiry was conduct ed against t he pet it ioner and t wo ot her officers nam ely Sri Sri Kuldeep Singh and Sri Yashpal Singh. Since all of t hem were served wit h different chargesheet s, t herefore, different inquiries were conduct ed on t he sam e set of charges, and t he I nquiry Officer has subm it t ed separat e I nquiry Report s. However, respondent no.1 has accept ed t he I nquiry Report , in respect of Sri Kuldeep Singh, but has direct ed re- inquiry in t he m at t er of t he pet it ioner and Sri Yashpal Singh.

4. Learned counsel for t he pet it ioner would t ake t his Court t hrough Rule 9 of t he Ut t arakhand Governm ent Servant ( Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 2003 ( as am ended by Am endm ent Rules, 2010) , and would subm it t hat t he respondent s have not com plied wit h Rule 9( 1) of t he aforesaid Rules. Rule 9( 1) of t he aforesaid Rules, insofar as it is relevant , reads as under: “ 9 . A ct i o n o n I n q u i r y Re p o r t — ( 1) The Disciplinar y Aut horit y m ay, for reasons t o be recorded in writ ing, rem it t he case for re- inquiry t o t he sam e or any ot her I nquiry Officer under int im at ion t o t he 2 charged Governm ent Servant . The I nquiry Officer shall t hereupon proceed t o hold t he inquiry from such st age as direct ed by t he Disciplinary Aut horit y, according t o t he provisions of Rule- 7.”

5. From a perusal of t he aforesaid Rule, it is apparent t hat t he Disciplinary Aut horit y m ay, for reasons t o be recorded in writ ing, rem it t he case for re- inquiry t o t he sam e, or any ot her I nquiry Officer, under int im at ion t o t he charged Governm ent Servant , and, t hereaft er, t he inquiry shall be proceeded from such st age as direct ed t he Disciplinary Aut horit y, according t o t he provisions of Rule 7.

6. Aft er perusing t he order im pugned in t he Writ Pet it ion, it is apparent t hat no reasons have been recorded by t he Disciplinary Aut horit y t o show, as t o why it has ordered for re- inquiry in t he m at t er of t he pet it ioner, whereas on t he sam e set of charges, t he Disciplinary Aut horit y has accept ed t he finding of t he I nquiry Officer respect of anot her delinquent em ployee - Sri Kuldeep Singh.

7. Having regard t o t he fact s and circum st ances of t he case, and having regard t o Rule 9( 1) of t he Ut t arakhand Governm ent Servant ( Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 2003, t he im pugned order dat ed 3

17.03.2025 passed by t he respondent s is, hereby, quashed and set- aside. The respondent s are direct ed t o redo t he m at t er, from t he st age of considerat ion of t he inquiry report , st rict ly as per t he provisions of t he Ut t arakhand Governm ent Servant ( Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 2003. I t is furt her direct ed t hat t he whole inquiry proceedings be com plet ed wit hin a period of four m ont hs since t he chargesheet was issued on

21.08.2023.

8. Wit h t he aforesaid observat ions, t he Writ Pet it ion is disposed of. As a sequel t heret o, t he m iscellaneous pet it ions, if any pending, shall st and closed. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ G. N A REN DA R, C.J. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ A LOK M A H RA , J. Dt : 2 nd April, 2025 UJJWAL 4