6)

lli THE HIGH C

PRINCI~URT OF MADHYA PRADESH
- AL S·EAT AT JABALPUR

W.P. NO. ;26801 OF 2021

PETITIONERS
Smt. Preeti Hirakane & Another

VERSUS

RESPONDENTS
State of M.P. & Others

REPLY ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENTS

The answering respondents most hu_mbly beg to submit as under:-

1. The instant writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated
30/07/2019. (P/7), whereby the husband of the petitioner No. 1 was
inflicted with the punishment of dismissal from service. The
husband of the petitioner No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as the
employee in ·question) filed appeal against the dismissal order, and
the said appeal has also been dismissed vide appellate order dated
26/08/2021 after following due procedure and principles of natural
justice. The petitioner has chosen not to challenge the appellate
order dated 26/08/2021 (P/ 11). The petitioner relying on the facts
and grounds mentioned in the writ petition has prayed for following
reliefs :-

(i) To quash the dismissal order dated 30.07.2019 (P/7)

'{;.(iATft /0::.. passed by respondent No. 2 .
.-.~ ~ . (t/J"/ j,[o direct the respondents for give the pension gratuity
:!: .;..., ~,, , , .a nd other retirement benefits with 18% interest p .a.
~ ,:/1... ]·1-i:{~;: . .,.,.i , ~- • •
,;•. , ,.s.,t,,.,-: 1,//· -'1it,j,I. !f<o direct the respondents to gwe cornpasswnate
,~~:f•?t s• .
I , "'a ppointment to petitioner No. 2 who is minor son of late
, ,·,. </ Yogesh Hirkane when he become major and qualified for
~ , , ,, , ,,,· ,; . the same,

Jl •:Jui 201fJ!J Any other reliefs, which deems fit and proper be also
awarded in favour of the petitioner.

2. The answering respondent most respectfully submits ,,.'that all the

contentions raised by the petitioner are baseless, misconceived and
 devoid of sub st
. ance and are hereby denied. Therefore, no
interference is called for m . the instant petition and the instant
..
. .
petition deserves t 0 b e d1sm1ssed by this Hon 'ble Court.

3 . The answering re . that the by virtue of the penalty

spond ents submit
0rder dated 30/07/2019, the employee in question was awarded the
· 1 from service.
punishment of d'1sm1Ssa . . penalty order has
The srud
been confirmed bY the appe 11ate authority . .
v1de order dated
26 /08/2021. A bare reading of orders dated 30 / 07/2019 and
26 /08/2021, make it clear that no error can be found with the order
impugned as the same have been passed following the procedure
established by law and following the principles of natural justice.

It is important to mention here that after filing appeal against

the penalty order, the employee in question was personally heard as
well on 19/12/2019 which is evident from a bare reading of Para 7
of the app<;llate order dated 26/08/2021. Unfortunately before any
final decision in the appeal, the employee in question passed away
on 09/03/2020. Pursuant to the same, the petitioner No. 1
preferred representation dated 29/10/2020 before the appellate
authority, seeking exoneration of the charges against her late
husband on sympathetic and humanitarian_ grounds as well.
However, the appeal was dismissed vide order dated 26/08/2021,
considering the gravity of the prcved charges against the employee
in question. The appellate order dated 26/08/2021 has not been
l
challenged in the instant petition and hence has attained finality . I
,/. -·;:~ ~Q - , _ Even otherwise, the appellate order is a reasoned and speaking
'·41 0,,.,,., -, .. .-~ ~ \
<"'' · ·.:~er passed after the following the principles of natural justice and \

. . ~ .. ; tJ; \.procedure established by law. No interference ought to be made

St,~.,: -~~- ·', -1., \ _ • •
r'.:t.P ~:i fi t,,( ;••;.J\1,'j~i-the instant petition and the same deserves to be d1sm1ssed.
'-

, "•\.... 4 ..~-T~e answering respondents submit that the instant writ petition is
,;;fu;;iJi. ,·
&~· 11 -~ ~
~ -'<"· baseless, misconceived and deserves to be dismissed. The scope of
interference in cases of punishment after enquiry is extremely
-~ limited as has been time and again held by the Hon'ble Supreme
. c'8urt. In (2011) 10 sec 244, (2013) 10 sec 106, (200'"/) 7 sec
I . .)

·:;;, · i, --· 257, (2013) 12 sec 372, etc and various other judgments of the
Hon 'ble Supreme Court and the Hon 'ble High Court, it has been
held that there is very limited scope of judicial interference once the
 ~
~/

enq uir y has b d uftcr

tne nt has been in11 ict:c
een com ple ted .an d. pun ish
d
following due law . The petitioner ln the
. pro ce Ure est abl ish ed by
··
ins tan t w ·t gro und s of vlo11:ltion of
n pet itio n has •not rais ed any . . .
pri nci ple s of nat u l · any v10 lat1 on ol due procedtu·e
ra Jus tice or . I·
est abl ish ed by law I b ms tan t wri t petition
· n a sen ce of the sam e, the
des erv es to be dis mis sed .

5 ugned da ted
ts sub mit tha t the orders imp
· Th e ans we rin g res pon den
a bHre
3 1 are rea son ed ord ers and
0 IO? I 20 I 9 and 26 / 08/ 202
can be found
dem ons trat e tha t no err or
per usa l of the sam e would
after giving
are spe aki ng orders pas sed
with the m. The sai d ord ers
ure . Thu s in
and following the due proced
due opp ort uni ty of hea rin g
l interference,
s of limited scope of judicia
lig ht of the set tled pri nci ple
.
d in the ins tan t writ petition
no int erf ere nce is wa rra nte

itioner has not

den ts sub mit tha t the pet
6. Th e ans we rin g res pon
to how the
in the writ petition as
dem ons tra ted any wh ere
and thu s in
ockingly disproportionate"
pun ish me nt inflicted is "sh
writ petition is
ntio ned above, the ins tan t
ligh t of the jud gm ent s me
were found to
rge s aga ins t the petitioner
not ma int ain abl e. The cha
appee.l was
pun ish me nt was given . The
be pro ved and acc ord ing ly
after giving
d by pas sin g rea son ed order
dul y con sid ere d and rejecte
ted in the
us no interference is warran
opp ort uni ty of hea rin g. Th
ins tan t wri t pet itio n.

e of pun ish me n t
The ans we rin g res pon den ts sub mit tha t in a ca:s
7.
pe of judicial
law jur isp rud enc e, the sco
aft er enq uir y in service
of appeal. Thus
writ cou rt to act as a cou rt
rev iew doe s not allo w the
ins tan t writ
ed by the pet itio ner in the
in lig ht of the gro und s rais
d as the
itio ner can not be considere
pet itio n, the Case of the pet
t writ petition
tan t wri t pet itio n is not an app eal . The ins tan
ins
gro und s raised by
des erv es to b e d 1sm . 1s . sed as• the re are no cog ent
would ~ar ran t
tan t writ pet itio n which
the pet itio ner in the ins
found w1th the
le cou rt. No err or can be
. ,., ._.~•... , ... . erfiere nce by th1·s Hon'b
int
art me nta l enq uir y can be
!:,'l: ". f:t )~' . pug ne d . Th e rec ord of the dep
' ;;'q
1_
f) / . -'Q" 'rder 1m
' · when
of this Hon'ble cou rt as and
. ;:.'" ¢,,! ~ ~_{.)( I '1 '!:~-de ava ilab le for the per nsa l
..- !l .i t"'- .
urt .
.. . ,,_. -~1 .:N' .,.,1 i ..c t ed by thi s Ho n'b le Co
\,, ,...-". d ir.e.
,.~. ~ . , i.1 ·
'.,. \ ..~-i._,;- 1:fi!J-.,~ "" t \14-'.\'v:·: ' Jl:..r
''
\\
,'-,,.

' ,- ,--~-,~}~,\:···~·-: ··'

11 8. Th e re sp on de nt s su bm it th at af ter co nd uc .
tin g
an sw er in g . mg
· . . op po rtu ni ty of he ar
de pa rtm en ta l en· qu uy , w 1uc h en tai led pr op er
ary
· 1 d" ide nc e, th e dis cip lin
to th e . pe tit io ne r , in c u mg re co rd in g of ev
tl . e pe na lty or de r da ted
au th or ity ca m e t 0 1e co nc lu sio n of pa ss in g th
er
re as on ed or de r, aft
30 /0 7/ 20 19 · Tl le or de r of pe na lty is a
no t
e pe tit io ne r ha s
fo llo wi ng th e ct ue pr oc ed ur e of law . Th
. . . r of pe na lty
de m on str at ed an vv
, h .e 111
r e1
·
t 11e wn t pe tit ion ho w th e 01 ·de
J
at he r
d in la w Th e ti't• ne r ha s me rel y ma de su bm iss io ns th
is ba · pe 10
me nt of the
un bl em ish ed rec or d. Th e sa id av er
hu sb an d ha d an ag ain st the
or ica lly de nie d. Th e ac tio n tak en
pe tit io ne r is ca teg he d by law ,
nt to fol lO \.v ing th e pr oc ed ur e es tab lis
pe tit io ne r is pu rs ua th e ch ar ge s ag ain st
the
te r co m in g to th e co nc lu sio n th at
an d af Th e im pu gn ed or de
r of
r ha ve be en fo un d to be pr ov ed .
pe tit io ne th e pe tit ion er No . 1
el f de m on str at es th at th e hu sb an d of
pe na lty its th or ize dl y ab se nt
al of fe nd er an d us ed to re ma in un au
wa s a ha bi tu gu ar d roo m. Th e
co ns um e alc oh ol in du tie s ho ur s in the
an d us ed to in th e mi dd le of
es tio n wa s fo un d in dr un ke n sta te
em pl oy ee in qu ca pt ur ed by the
ph ot og ra ph s of wh ich ha ve be en
th e ro ad , th e pu tat ion of the
wh ich als o ha s tar ni sh ed th e re
in ed ia pe rs on s, tio n is gra ve in
e of fen ce of th e em plo ye e in qu es
de pa rtm en t. Th al int erf ere nc e in
lig ht of th e lim ite d sc op e of jud ici
na tu re , an d in
rv es fo be dis mi sse d.
s lik e th es e, th e in sta nt pe tit io n de se
ca se
th re sp ec t to gr an t
of
re lie f 7 (iii ) is co nc er ne d wi
Th at as fa r as de nt No . 2 (m ino r
so n), the
.
9. . . nn en t to re sp on no
ap po m th is sta ge. the re is
co m pa ss io na te d th e gr ou nd th at at
. . se on en
sa id re lie f is op po tm en t wh ich ha s be
an t of co mp as sio na te ap po in rel ief
. .
f th e em plo ye e in
qu es tio n. Th e
ap pl ic at io n fo r gr . If an d
·t d by th e de pe nd
an t o 'd ed at th is sta ge
ns 1 er
su br m te an d ca nn ot be co t ap po in tm en t wi ll be fil ed by
.
7(i ii) is pr em at ur e 0n a e in
I' ti O n fo r co mp as s1 . . it wi ll be de alt wi th
wh en th e ap p ic a th n,
mp lo ye e in qu es t10 lic y for co mp as sio na te
e . bl .
e
th e de pe nd an t. of la w an d th e ap pl lca e po ev en oth erw ise the
. d h . th at
ac co rd an ce wi th er e
# be in fo rm e sis tan t
64~ t en 1p loy me nt as As
t
ha s . o
ap po in tm en t. It d · ao ve rn me n ain ed in the
al re a y m _o of th e ba r co nt
·/ No . 1 is ar c no t
~~ - pe tit io ne r
he nc e in vie w1·c y th e ot he r de pe nd an t
, ,. (', .
. O:,V·. .v
~. .
V ....
~ "
.,. <f
.
ea ch er , an
d
·n tm en t po i '
·n tm en t. An y wh ich wa y
the
· ~ -- .
·./ \ ~a _o mp as sio na te ap
po i
ap po 1 . d by th is Ho n'b le
-· ~~--· m pa ss 10 na te be ig no re
.· t : $'. an y co to ~

-r C:-l_;n ,;.;-, :~: nt itl ed io r d de se rv es th at th e po lic y or

. ~ .. , _-
,:.., . • "
e· . d
"'~---a f is pr em at ur e an
,,

ke pt 1·n m in
·_, .· ' , ..
_ , ·,
••
~ Ii
_...-.:L, , R l<.x,,-:.·~
'--

-- . · ,' :s,:: u, re e to be
:, \ · •~ al so
· \ It ha s
'_-; ;- ,1 iJ_ _ - ; : ~--~ ou rt .
· ~~l__:zc;_:; ~--
 le to thos e depe ndan ts
I com pass iona te appo intm ent is appl icab
ng service. In the inst ant
whe rein the emp loye e pass es awa y duri
dism isse d from service on
case , the emp loye e in ques tion was
09/0 3/20 20 . Thu s even
30/0 7/20 19 and has pass ed awa y on
intm ent is
othe rwis e, the claim for com pass iona te appo
less and dese rves to be
misc once ived . The inst ant petit ion is base
dism isse d.

e here inab ove, no case is mad e

10. Tha t, in view of the subm issio ns mad
'ble Cou rt in exer cise of its
out war rant ing inte rfere nce ·of this Hon
erin g resp ond ents are not
extr aord inar y writ juris dict ion. The answ
ever they rese rve thei r righ t
filin g para wise repl y to the petit ion. How
to file sam e if occa sion so arise s or if
so dire cted by the Hon 'ble
dese rves to be dism isse d.
I
I

Cou rt. The peti tion bein g bere ft of mer it j,

►
An affid avit is filed in supp ort.

(O FF IC ER .E l
DA T~u~ J'U't~
2022

PLA CE: - Jab alpu r

COUNSEL ~ RESPONDENTS