Judgment:
Civil Writ Petition No.7151 of 2013 (O&M) {1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: July 04, 2014 Devender Beniwal ...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana & others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH Present: Mr.Puneet Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr.Sunil Nehra, Sr.DAG, Haryana, for the State.
Mr.Ashwani Chopra, Senior Advocate with Mr.Naveen S.
Bhardwaj, Advocate, for the applicant.
***** AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J.(ORAL) Petitioner has approached this Court praying for issuance of a writ of mandamus to change the Enquiry Officer.
During the couRs.of hearing, it so transpires that the matter is being expedited by the Enquiry Officer in the light of the directions issued by this Court.
Counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has no objection to the Enquiry Officer proceeding with the enquiry expeditiously.
However, the petitioner should also be given a reasonable opportunity to defend himself, so that the principles of natural justice are not violated.
The Kumar Ramesh 2014.07.07 14:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh Civil Writ Petition No.7151 of 2013 (O&M) {2} witnesses, who are to be examined by the Enquiry Officer on a particular date, should be intimated to the petitioner, so that he is aware of the witnesses whom he is likely to confront and for what purpose.
It so happens that a person is called from a particular office and he is called upon to give his statement which leads to a position where petitioner is totally caught unaware.
He asserts that the petitioner would cooperate in the enquiry and would prefer early conclusion thereof provided a reasonable opportunity is granted to him to defend himself.
Counsel for the respondent-State contends that there can be no objection to the assertions as have been made by the counsel for the petitioner nor can be there an objection to the effect that the principles of natural justice need to be complied with.
Learned Senior Counsel, who is also present in Court for the complainant, states that he also does not have any objection to the statement made by the counsel for the petitioner.
In view of the above, the present writ petition is disposed of with directions to the Enquiry Officer to conclude the enquiry expeditiously preferably within a period of three months.
It is made clear that the list of witnesses, who are to be examined on the next date of hearing, should be duly intimated to the petitioner in advance and he should be given a reasonable opportunity to cross-examine if he so desires.
The statements, which have been recorded during the enquiry proceedings in the absence of the petitioner, shall not be taken into consideration without affording an opportunity to the petitioner to cross- Kumar Ramesh 2014.07.07 14:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh Civil Writ Petition No.7151 of 2013 (O&M) {3} examine the said witnesses.
In view of the above, no orders are required to be passed on the Civil Misc.Application No.10522 of 2013.
The same also stands disposed of.
July 04, 2014 ( AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ) ramesh JUDGE Kumar Ramesh 2014.07.07 14:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh