Judgment:
W.P.No.6367/2012 18-7-2012 Shri Ajay Raizada , learned counsel for the petitioner.
Shri Sanjeev K.
Singh, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondents.
Challenging the charge sheet issued to the petitioner under the M.P.Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1966 and the Police Regulations, this writ petition has been filed seeking a prayer for quashing the charge sheet.
Quashment of charge sheet is sought for on two counts.
Firstly, a punishment of fine of Rs.25,000/- has been imposed upon the petitioner and therefore, if further proceedings are held, the same would amount to double jeopardy.
Prima facie this argument looks attractive but the question is as to whether recovery of the compensation as recommended by the Human Rights Commission can be termed as punishment for misconduct under the provisions of Discipline and Appeal Rules, this question can be considered and decided by the disciplinary authority and petitioner may raise such objection before the appropriate authority.
On such consideration, interference into the matter is not called for.
The second ground canvassed is that after examining the report of the Human Rights Commission, a competent authority of the department had exonerated the petitioner and therefore, not further proceeding in the matter is not permissible on the same set of circumstances.
Shri Sanjeev K.
Singh, learned Panel Lawyer points out that exoneration of the petitioner recorded in Annexure P/3 is by Deputy Superintendent of Police and not the Disciplinary Authority after going through the same has decided to proceed in the enquiry.
This objection is in fact the defence of the petitioner and should be considered by the competent authority.
This Court cannot step into the shoes of the disciplinary authority or enquiry officer and exonerate the petitioner on considering the defence of the petitioner on merit.
Accordingly, I find much force in this objection raised by learned counsel for the State.
At this stage when only a charge sheet is issued, in the absence of any statutory rules or regulations being violated in initiating the departmental proceeding, on the grounds raised interference is not called for.
It is for the petitioner to raise all these objections before the enquiry officer or the disciplinary authority and it is for the said authorities to proceed in accordance with law after such consideration.
With liberty to the petitioner to raise the objections before the disciplinary authority or enquiry officer, and directing the authority to consider the objection before proceeding in the matter, this petition is disposed of.
c.c.as per rules.
(Rajendra Menon) Judge mrs.Mishra