Heard Mr. Thakar, learned advocate for the petitioner, and Mr Patel, learned AGP, for the respondent - State Government.
2. The petitioner in present writ petition is the same officer who has also preferred another writ petition being Special Civil Application No.3788 of 2012, which is disposed of by a separate order of even date, i.e. 27.3.2012.
In present petition, the petitioner has prayed for similar reliefs as have been prayed for by him in Special Civil Application No.3788 of 2012.
In present case also, the departmental inquiry i.e. second inquiry is pending against the petitioner which is initiated pursuant to the charge-sheet dated 21.2.2006.
3. In present petition the petitioner has prayed that:-
"8(b) quash and set aside the chargesheet dated 21/02/2006 issued by respondent no.1 authority on the ground of unreasonable delay in concluding the departmental inquiry; and / or
(c) direct respondent authority no.1 to consider the case of the petitioner for the promotion to the post of Deputy Executive Engineer with all consequential benefits w.e.f. 05/01/2011 on which 39 juniors to the petitioner have been promoted by the respondent no.1; and / or "
4. So far as the proceedings of departmental inquiry are concerned, learned advocate for the petitioner has submitted that the proceedings have almost reached final stage inasmuch as the Inquiry Officer has submitted his report, however, further decision by the Disciplinary / Competent Authority has not been taken pursuant to the report of the Inquiry Officer.
5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and also keeping in focus the order passed in Special Civil Application No.3788 of 2012, it appears that there is no need, in present petition, to pass any other or separate directions so far as petitioner's request for promotion to the next higher post is concerned. Actually, in view of the fact that the inquiry has been concluded and the Inquiry Officer's report has already been submitted, observations and directions, which are made in Special Civil Application No.3788 of 2012 would also not be necessary. However, it is clarified that the relief prayed for in para - 8(c) of present petition is covered by the observations made in the order in Special Civil Application No.3788 of 2012 and that therefore, any other order is not passed.
5.1 So far as the proceedings of departmental inquiry is concerned, having regard to the submissions made by learned advocate for the petitioner that the proceedings are already concluded and Inquiry Officer has already submitted his report, the Disciplinary / Competent Authority is directed to take necessary and appropriate decision in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably on or before 15.7.2012.
The request made by the petitioner to quash and set aside the chargesheet on the ground that the proceedings came to be commenced, after delay, does not deserve to be granted at this stage in facts and circumstances of present case. If at all the final decision of the Disciplinary Authority is against the petitioner then it would be open to the petitioner to challenge the said decision before the appropriate Forum and at that time all contentions against the final decision would be available to the petitioner. The request for quashing and setting aside the charge sheet is not entertained at this stage.
With the aforesaid observations, clarifications and direction, present petition stands disposed of. Direct service is permitted.
(K.M.Thaker, J.) kdc Top