Jagbir Singh v. State Of Haryana & ORS
CWP-12896-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CWP-12896-2017 Date of Decision: May 14, 2024 Jagbir Singh .... Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and others .... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI Present: - Mr. N. S. Swaitch, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. S. S. Mann, Addl. A.G., Haryana.
**** HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI, J. (ORAL) 1.
!" #
$ %" &
& ' % (
'
&'
& ' % " & )
%"
'
' & * % %
% %" (+
%&
"
'
%
' %"
!
"% ! ', % !% !
" !% %"
ARCHANA ARORA 2024.05.22 09:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CWP-12896-2017 - I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record of the case with their able assistance. 5.
It may be noticed that the petitioner was exonerated by the enquiry officer of the allegations alleged against him. It is only upon the fact that the Punishing Authority did not agree with the findings of the enquiry officer, a disagreement note was issued and was given to the petitioner after which, the petitioner was given the punishment of censure. The punishment of censure is a minor punishment. The charges framed against the petitioner were also not that serious for which he was being punished. Once, a minor punishment has been imposed upon the petitioner treating the period of suspension as a leave of the kind due is without any valid justification. Hence, the period of suspension be treated as a duty period but, without any further emoluments over and above the suspension allowance already paid so that, the petitioner does not suffer any prejudice at the time of his retirement qua the said period to be treated as qualifying service.
6.
The writ petition is disposed of in above terms. May 14, 2024 ( HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI ) archana JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No ARCHANA ARORA 2024.05.22 09:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document