Kashi Ram Agrawal Vs. State and ors - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1088533
CourtRajasthan Jodhpur High Court
Decided OnOct-01-2013
AppellantKashi Ram Agrawal
RespondentState and ors
Excerpt:
1 saw no.950/2013 21 d.b.civil special appeal no.950/2013 kashi ram agarwal versus state of raj. & ors.date of order: 1st october 2013. hon'ble mr.justice dinesh maheshwari hon'ble mr.justice v.k.mathur mr.d.s.sodha, for the appellant. after having heard the learned counsel for the appellant and having perused the material placed on record, we are not persuaded to consider interference in the order dated 11.07.2013 whereby, the learned single judge of this court has dismissed the writ petition (cwp no.2447/2003) filed by the petitioner-appellant seeking to question the order dated 07.01.1999 whereby, as a consequence of the punishment awarded in the disciplinary proceedings, he was reverted from the post of upper divisional clerk to the post of lower divisional clerk in the office of krishi upaj mandi samiti, sirohi. the sum and substance of the matter remains that there had been the allegations of misfeasance and embezzlement against the petitioner-appellant in relation to the provident fund accounts of the employees. though before the learned single judge, the contentions as regards denial of opportunity of hearing and violation of principles of natural justice were urged but the learned single judge has observed that the petitioner himself had admitted his guilt and ultimately submitted the application showing his unwillingness to inspect the record. the documents placed on record, including the petitioner’s application dated 03.08.1987 (annex.r/3/1).make out that he had rather admitted his act of embezzlement and proposed to deposit the amount embezzled. 2 saw no.950/2013 the learned single judge, in our view, has rightly observed that despite having been found guilty of such a major misconduct, the employer had been rather considerate in only reverting him to the lower post. in the given circumstances, the fact of the petitioner-appellant having been acquitted by the criminal court while extending benefit of doubt is of no avail. so far inquiry in question is concerned, no case of prejudice is made out; and the learned single judge cannot be said to have erred in declining to interfere. the appeal fails and is, therefore, dismissed summarily. (v.k.mathur),j. (dinesh maheshwari),j. cpgoyal//-
Judgment:

1 SAW No.950/2013 21 D.B.Civil Special Appeal No.950/2013 Kashi Ram Agarwal versus State of Raj.

& ORS.DATE OF ORDER

: 1st October 2013.

HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE V.K.MATHUR Mr.D.S.Sodha, for the appellant.

<><><> After having heard the learned counsel for the appellant and having perused the material placed on record, we are not persuaded to consider interference in the order dated 11.07.2013 whereby, the learned Single Judge of this Court has dismissed the writ petition (CWP No.2447/2003) filed by the petitioner-appellant seeking to question the order dated 07.01.1999 whereby, as a consequence of the punishment awarded in the disciplinary proceedings, he was reverted from the post of Upper Divisional Clerk to the post of Lower Divisional Clerk in the office of Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Sirohi.

The sum and substance of the matter remains that there had been the allegations of misfeasance and embezzlement against the petitioner-appellant in relation to the Provident Fund Accounts of the employees.

Though before the learned Single Judge, the contentions as regards denial of opportunity of hearing and violation of principles of natural justice were urged but the learned Single Judge has observed that the petitioner himself had admitted his guilt and ultimately submitted the application showing his unwillingness to inspect the record.

The documents placed on record, including the petitioner’s application dated 03.08.1987 (Annex.R/3/1).make out that he had rather admitted his act of embezzlement and proposed to deposit the amount embezzled.

2 SAW No.950/2013 The learned Single Judge, in our view, has rightly observed that despite having been found guilty of such a major misconduct, the employer had been rather considerate in only reverting him to the lower post.

In the given circumstances, the fact of the petitioner-appellant having been acquitted by the Criminal Court while extending benefit of doubt is of no avail.

So far inquiry in question is concerned, no case of prejudice is made out; and the learned Single Judge cannot be said to have erred in declining to interfere.

The appeal fails and is, therefore, dismissed summarily.

(V.K.MATHUR),J.

(DINESH MAHESHWARI),J.

cpgoyal//-