D.B. Civil Special Appeal (W) No. 925/2014. Case: State of Rajasthan and Ors. Vs Dhapu Bai. Rajasthan High Court
| Case Number | D.B. Civil Special Appeal (W) No. 925/2014 |
| Counsel | For Appellant: Sunil Joshi, Assisting Counsel to AAG and For Respondents: Pradeep Choudhary, Adv. |
| Judges | Govind Mathur and Jaishree Thakur, JJ. |
| Issue | Service Law |
| Judgement Date | July 30, 2015 |
| Court | Rajasthan High Court |
Order:
-
The appeal is barred by limitation from 52 days. Two other defects have also been pointed out by the Registry and those too have not been removed by the appellant State of Rajasthan. Ignoring the defects pointed out by the Registry, we have examined merits of the appeal.
-
Briefly stated, facts of the case are that husband of respondent-petitioner Smt. Dhapu Bai was in employment of the State of Rajasthan as Patwari. He was subjected to disciplinary action and was removed from service under an order dated 01.5.1985. The appeal preferred by him as per provisions of Section 23 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules of 1958') also came to be rejected under an order dated 29.11.1985. To question correctness of the order passed by the disciplinary authority as well as appellate authority, husband of the respondent-petitioner preferred a petition for writ, being SBCWP No. 431/1986 (Kanhaiya Lal v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.), which came to be accepted by learned Single Bench of this Court on 18.11.1996. The learned Single Bench accepted the writ petition by relying upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Managing Director, ECIL, Hyderabad v. B. Karunakar reported in JT 1993 (6) SC 1 by accepting the fact that before imposing penalty of dismissal from service, a report of enquiry was not supplied to him. The learned Single Bench set aside the order dated 29.11.1985 passed by the appellate authority and left it open for the disciplinary authority to supply a copy of enquiry report to the delinquent government servant, the government servant was at liberty to furnish his explanation and to file fresh appeal before the appellate authority.
-
The present appellant by way of filing an appeal questioned correctness of the judgment passed by learned Single Bench dated 18.11.1996, however, the appeal aforesaid came to be dismissed as withdrawn under the order dated 6.2.2008. The appeal was withdrawn as during pendency of that, the delinquent government servant died. After death of the government servant, the Board of Revenue, Rajasthan, Ajmer under a letter dated 31.3.2009 while forwarding a representation submitted by the present respondent-petitioner to have post-retiral benefits observed that after death of delinquent government servant, the entire disciplinary action initiated against him stands automatically closed. The Collector (Land...
To continue reading
Request your trial