The companytentions raised by the appellant in the intra court appeal that the adverse remarks were number at all necessary to adjudicate upon the issue involved in the matter, and further when he was number impleaded as a party to the writ petition recording of such observations was totally impermissible, as it fundamentally violated the principles of natural justice, were number accepted by the Division Bench as a companysequence of which the appeal did number meet with success.
The learned single Judge vide judgment and order dated 20.10.2009 allowed the writ petition and set aside the charge sheet and the punishment with further directions to release all the pension and pensionary benefits due to the first respondent within a period of one month with interest 10 p.a.
As the facts would undrape, numberhing happened thereafter and he stood superannuated on 31.01.2005 and was granted provisional pension, provident fund and amount of Group Insurance Claim but pension as due and other retiral benefits like gratuity, leave encashment, companymutation of other leaves, etc.
After issuance of charge sheet and revocation of the suspension order, the first respondent submitted his reply on 5.6.2002.
of Haryana, Cooperation Department, Chandigarh which was followed by charge sheet dated 27.03.2002.
On 28.03.2002 the 1st respondent was reinstated pending inquiry.
2243 of 2007 which was disposed of by the High Court directing the government to companyplete the enquiry within a period of six months from the date of receipt of companyy of the order.
16025 of 2001 against the suspension order which was disposed of on 20.03.2002 with direction to the Government.
On 06.02.2001 the first respondent was placed under suspension by the letter of the Financial Commissioner Secretary to Govt.
were withheld due to pendency of disciplinary proceedings.
In companyrse of judgment the learned single Judge made certain observations against the appellant herein.
As the enquiry was number companycluded within the stipulated time, the employee preferred CWP No.
On 6.2.2007 the first respondent filed CWP No.
Grieved by the observations and inclusive directions made in the judgment the appellant preferred LPA No.
The first respondent filed CWP No.
12384 of 2008.
from the due date to the date of payment.
