Damayanti Rawat v. State of Uttarakhand and Another

JUDGMENT : (per Mr. Alok Mahra J.) The petitioner has filed the present writ petition for quashing the impugned second charge sheet dated 13.12.2024 and impugned suspension order dated

19.12.2024 passed by respondent no. 1, whereby, the services of the petitioner was suspended with immediate effect on the ground of proposed disciplinary proceedings.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the 1 petitioner is presently posted as Block Education Officer, Kirtinagar, Tehri Garhwal and, after suspension, she has has been attached to the office of the Chief Education Officer, Tehri, District Tehri Garhwal; that, on

27.12.2017 an Office Order was issued by the Secretary, Uttarakhand Building and other Construction Workers Welfare Board, Dehradun, whereby, decision was taken to take the services of petitioner (who was working as Deputy Director, Central Education Service at that time) on deputation in the office of Uttarakhand Building and Other Construction Employees Welfare Board, Dehradun from her parent department. On 07.04.2018, the Director, Employees State Insurance Corporation, Uttarakhand (hereinafter referred as ESIC) issued a letter the Secretary, Labour Department, Uttarakhand, wherein he informed that a Super Specialty Hospital has to be established in Kotdwar, District Pauri Garhwal. Thereafter, on 05.03.2019, the Hon’ble Minister, Labour Department issued an order directing the Secretary, BOCW and Director, ESIC to release fund of Rs. 50 Crore in favour of the working agency. Thereafter, the MoU was executed for releasing the fund of Rs.50 Crore, out of which, Rs. 40 Crore were released by cheque and the same was sent by the 2 petitioner in the capacity of the Secretary to the Director, ESIC. Thereafter, on 30.12.2020, a letter was issued by the Joint Secretary, Preliminary Fact Finding Committee Govt. of Uttarakhand to the petitioner, whereby she was asked to submit her explanation on the 05 points, which was replied by the petitioner on

02.01.2021. On 22.09.2021, a charge sheet was issued to the petitioner wherein she was charged with specific 05 charges and was directed to submit her explanation within 15 days.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that from a bare perusal of show-cause notice dated

22.09.2021, it is evident that, at the top, it is mentioned that it is a show cause notice, but in the body, the petitioner was charge sheeted for specific five charges, which were enumerated in it. He submits that, after receiving the charge sheet, petitioner denied all the charges vide her reply dated 27.10.2021. After the petitioner has submitted her reply, the Disciplinary Authority did not take any action on the above show case notice/charge sheet. Surprisingly respondent no.2 has now issued a charge sheet dated 13.12.2024 contending the same and similar charges, where was 3 earlier issued to the petitioner on 22.09.2021. Beside this, respondent no.2 to have passed an order dated

19.12.2024 wherein petitioner has been suspended. Thus, feeling aggrieved, petitioner is before us.

4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. The procedure for conducting the disciplinary proceedings against the government servant is governed by ‘The Uttarakhand Government Servants (Discipline and Appeal) (Amendment) Rules, 2010’. Rule 7 of the Rules, 2010 ordains procedure for imposing major punishment, Rule 7 (1) provides that ‘whenever the Disciplinary Authority is of the opinion that there are grounds to inquire into the charge of misconduct or misbehaviour against the government servant, he may conduct an inquiry’. The relevant extract of the Rule 7 are reproduced below:- “……….. (1) Whenever the Disciplinary Authority is of the opinion that there are grounds to inquire into the charge of misconduct or misbehaviour against the government servant, he may conduct an inquiry. (2) The facts constituting the misconduct on which it is proposed to take action shall be reduced in the form of definite charge or charges to be called charge sheet. The charge sheet shall be signed by the Disciplinary Authority. 4 Provided that where appointing authority is Governor, the charge-sheet may be signed by the Principal Secretary or the Secretary, as the case may be, of the concerned department. Servant (3) The charges framed shall be so precise and clear as to give sufficient indication to the charged Government circumstances against him. The proposed documentary evidences and the name of witnesses proposed to prove the same along with oral evidences, if any, shall be mentioned in the chargesheet. (4) The chargesheet, alongwith the copy of documentary evidences mentioned therein and list of witnesses and their statements, if any, shall be served on the charged Government Servant personally or by registered post at the address mentioned in the official records. In case the chargesheet could not be served in aforesaid manner, the chargesheet shall be served by publication in a daily news paper having wide circulation. Provided that where the documentary evidence is voluminous, instead of furnishing its copy with chargesheet, the charged Government Servant shall be permitted to inspect the same. (5) The charged Government servant shall be required to put in a written statement in his defence in person on a specified date which shall not be less than 15 days from the date of issue of charge-sheet and to clearly inform whether he admits or not all or any of the charges mentioned in the chargesheet. The charged government servant shall also required to state whether he desires to cross examine any witness mentioned in the chargesheet whether he desires to give or produce any written or oral evidence in his defence. He shall be also be informed that in case he does not appear or file the written statement on the specified date, it will be presumed that he 5 has none to furnish and ex-parte inquiry shall be initiated against him. ................”

5. In the present case, as stated above, first charge-sheet on similar set of charges was issued to the petitioner on 22.09.2021 and petitioner has filed reply denying the charges, the Disciplinary Authority did not take any further action after receiving the reply, meaning thereby the Disciplinary Authority was satisfied with the reply submitted by the petitioner and they did not intend to take any further action against the petitioner as contemplated under ‘The Uttarakhand Government Servants (Discipline Appeal) (Amendment) Rules, 2010’. After a lapse of more than three years, again on the same set of charges, a new charge sheet has issued to her on 13.12.2024 without issuing the show cause notice. This act of the respondent is not in consonance with the provision contained in Rule 7 of the aforesaid Rules.

6. In such view of the matter, the impugned charge sheet as well as the consequential order is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned charge sheet dated 13.12.2024 as well as consequential suspension order dated 6

19.12.2024 is set aside. However, liberty is granted to the concerned respondent to proceed against the petitioner, as per applicable rules.

7. The writ petition stands ordered accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs. (G. NARENDAR, C.J.) Dated: 15.05.2025 BS (ALOK MAHRA, J.) 7