RSA-1179-2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA State of Punjab and ors. Usha Ohri CORAM: HON'BLE MR Present: Mr. for the Mr. for **** SUDEEPTI SHARMA J. 1. The present regular second appeal is and decree dated Amritsar whereby the civil suit filed by the respondent was decreed in her favour and judgment and decree dated 05.11.2008 passed by learned Addl. District Judge, Amritsar dismissed. 2. Brief facts of the case Tourism Department as Reception Officer on 20.04.1983. However, on duty, explanation was called from the respondent, who filed detailed reply but without considering her reply and affording any opportunity of being heard, major punishment was imposed upon her by reverting her to the post of Reception Officer Further, order dated 11.07.2002 09 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA-1179 Date of Decision State of Punjab and ors. vs. HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA Mr. Animesh Sharma, Addl. A.G. Punjab for the appellants. Mr. Prateek Mahajan, Advocate for the respondent. **** SUDEEPTI SHARMA J. he present regular second appeal is and decree dated 22.11.2006 passed by learned Amritsar whereby the civil suit filed by the respondent was decreed in her and judgment and decree dated 05.11.2008 passed by learned Addl. District Judge, Amritsar whereby the appeal filed by State of Punjab was Brief facts of the case as per civil su Tourism Department as Guide-cum-Clerk on 23.03.1976 and was promoted as Reception Officer on 20.04.1983. However, on duty, explanation was called from the respondent, who filed detailed reply but without considering her reply and affording any opportunity of being heard, major punishment was imposed upon her by reverting her to the post of cer from Tourist Officer, vide office order dated 06.03.2002. Further, order dated 11.07.2002 was passed placing the respondent under IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA 1179-2009 (O&M) Date of Decision: 28.07.2025 ......Appellants …..Respondent SUDEEPTI SHARMA Animesh Sharma, Addl. A.G. Punjab he present regular second appeal is preferred against judgment passed by learned Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.) Amritsar whereby the civil suit filed by the respondent was decreed in her and judgment and decree dated 05.11.2008 passed by learned Addl. whereby the appeal filed by State of Punjab was uit are that the respondent joined Clerk on 23.03.1976 and was promoted as Reception Officer on 20.04.1983. However, on allegations of absence from duty, explanation was called from the respondent, who filed detailed reply but without considering her reply and affording any opportunity of being heard, major punishment was imposed upon her by reverting her to the post of , vide office order dated 06.03.2002. was passed placing the respondent under judgment r. Divn.) Amritsar whereby the civil suit filed by the respondent was decreed in her and judgment and decree dated 05.11.2008 passed by learned Addl. whereby the appeal filed by State of Punjab was respondent joined Clerk on 23.03.1976 and was promoted as of absence from duty, explanation was called from the respondent, who filed detailed reply but without considering her reply and affording any opportunity of being heard, major punishment was imposed upon her by reverting her to the post of , vide office order dated 06.03.2002. was passed placing the respondent under Gaurav Arora 2025.08.20 19:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-1179-2009 2 suspension without any justification and without any dated 16.07.2002, the respondent was reinst dated 18.07.2002 of civil suit challenging the order dated 06.03.2002 the post of Reception Officer from Tourist Officer and or vide which she was prematurely retired. vide judgment and decree dated 22.11.2006 passed by learned Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.) Amritsar. The appellant filed appeal against the said judgment an decree, which was dismissed vide judgment and decree dated 05.11.2008 passed by learned Addl. District Judge, Amritsar. Hence the present appeal. 3. Learned counsel for the appellants contends that both the Courts failed to appreciate the evidence on re while dismissing the appeal filed by the appellants. present appeal be allowed. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent contends that the civil suit filed by the respondent has further argued that the appeal filed by the State of Punjab has also rightly dismissed. He, therefore, prays that the present dismissed. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties a record of this case with their able assistance. 6. A perusal of the record shows that post of Reception Officer from Tourist Officer 11.07.2002, she was placed under suspension without any justification and without any reason. The order dated 11.07.2002 was revoked within 05 days and she was reinstated in service was prematurely retired. No show cause notice was served upon the respondent and 09 suspension without any justification and without any dated 16.07.2002, the respondent was reinstated in service. Thereafter, dated 18.07.2002 of premature retirement was passed. The respondent then filed civil suit challenging the order dated 06.03.2002 the post of Reception Officer from Tourist Officer and or vide which she was prematurely retired. The civil suit was decreed in her favou vide judgment and decree dated 22.11.2006 passed by learned Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.) Amritsar. The appellant filed appeal against the said judgment an decree, which was dismissed vide judgment and decree dated 05.11.2008 passed by learned Addl. District Judge, Amritsar. Hence the present appeal. Learned counsel for the appellants contends that both the Courts failed to appreciate the evidence on record while deciding the civil suit and while dismissing the appeal filed by the appellants. present appeal be allowed. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent contends that the civil suit filed by the respondent has rightly been decreed in her favour. He further argued that the appeal filed by the State of Punjab has also rightly He, therefore, prays that the present I have heard learned counsel for the parties a record of this case with their able assistance. A perusal of the record shows that the respondent was reverted post of Reception Officer from Tourist Officer 11.07.2002, she was placed under suspension without any justification and without any reason. The order dated 11.07.2002 was revoked within 05 days and she was in service vide order dated 16.07.2002. Vide order date was prematurely retired. No show cause notice was served upon the respondent and suspension without any justification and without any cogent reason. Vide order ated in service. Thereafter, order premature retirement was passed. The respondent then filed civil suit challenging the order dated 06.03.2002 vide which she was reverted to the post of Reception Officer from Tourist Officer and order dated 18.07.2002 The civil suit was decreed in her favour vide judgment and decree dated 22.11.2006 passed by learned Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.) Amritsar. The appellant filed appeal against the said judgment and decree, which was dismissed vide judgment and decree dated 05.11.2008 passed by learned Addl. District Judge, Amritsar. Hence the present appeal. Learned counsel for the appellants contends that both the Courts cord while deciding the civil suit and while dismissing the appeal filed by the appellants.He, therefore, prays that the Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent contends that the rightly been decreed in her favour. He further argued that the appeal filed by the State of Punjab has also rightly been He, therefore, prays that the present regular second appeal be I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the whole the respondent was reverted to the post of Reception Officer from Tourist Officer on 06.03.2002. Thereafter, on 11.07.2002, she was placed under suspension without any justification and without any reason. The order dated 11.07.2002 was revoked within 05 days and she was vide order dated 16.07.2002. Vide order dated 18.07.2002, she was prematurely retired. No show cause notice was served upon the respondent and ide order order premature retirement was passed. The respondent then filed vide which she was reverted to der dated 18.07.2002 r vide judgment and decree dated 22.11.2006 passed by learned Addl. Civil Judge d decree, which was dismissed vide judgment and decree dated 05.11.2008 passed Learned counsel for the appellants contends that both the Courts cord while deciding the civil suit and He, therefore, prays that the Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent contends that the rightly been decreed in her favour. He been appeal be to the on 06.03.2002. Thereafter, on 11.07.2002, she was placed under suspension without any justification and without any reason. The order dated 11.07.2002 was revoked within 05 days and she was d 18.07.2002, she was prematurely retired. No show cause notice was served upon the respondent and Gaurav Arora 2025.08.20 19:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-1179-2009 3 no opportunity of being heard was given to her while passing the impugned order The respondent placed on record P1, vide which her services were put to an end by retiring her prematurely on 04.09.2001. This order was unsigned. The appellant letter dated 04.09.2001 but stated that order is not available and when Narinder Singh was examined as DW1, he did not deny the existence of letter dated 04.09.2001.The respondent was actually prematurely retired on 18.07.200 almost one year after posting of letter dated 04.09.2001 reports regarding the absence Secretary, Addl. Affairs and Director Tourism, Punjab has written letter to the Secretary to Government of Punjab, Department of Tourism, Chandigarh on 03.09.2002, which is exhibited as PW2/B.The same is re "Considering the submission and her claim, it is worth while to note that the Deputy Director Tourism who had processed the whole case to got retired prematurely the petitioner, could not give me the suitable reply neither he had sent t Director Tourism in a right way alongwith this it is pertinent to note that the claim submitted by the petitioner has been supported by the various Annexure as enclosed here. So prima facie it appears that the Deputy Director Tourism had mislead and misinformed, the Director in passing the order regarding the premature retirement of Mrs. Usha Ohri, formal Reception Officer.” 7. As per record, order pertaining to premature retirement of the respondent was not passed with the Secretary, Tourism and Cultural Affairs, Government of Punjab. adverse remarks her. She was promoted in t letter dated 04.09.2001 by the appellants, which was unsigned and vide order dated 09 no opportunity of being heard was given to her while passing the impugned order The respondent placed on record letter dated 04.0 P1, vide which her services were put to an end by retiring her prematurely on 04.09.2001. This order was unsigned. The appellant dated 04.09.2001 but stated that order is not available and when Narinder xamined as DW1, he did not deny the existence of letter dated 04.09.2001.The respondent was actually prematurely retired on 18.07.200 almost one year after posting of letter dated 04.09.2001 reports regarding the absence of the respondent from duty were made. The Addl. Secretary, Addl. Affairs and Director Tourism, Punjab has written letter to the Secretary to Government of Punjab, Department of Tourism, Chandigarh on 2002, which is exhibited as PW2/B.The same is re "Considering the submission and her claim, it is worth while to note that the Deputy Director Tourism who had processed the whole case to got retired prematurely the petitioner, could not give me the suitable reply neither he had sent the proposal in the Office of the Director Tourism in a right way alongwith this it is pertinent to note that the claim submitted by the petitioner has been supported by the various Annexure as enclosed here. So prima facie it appears that the Deputy or Tourism had mislead and misinformed, the Director in passing the order regarding the premature retirement of Mrs. Usha Ohri, formal Reception Officer.” As per record, order pertaining to premature retirement of the respondent was not passed with the approval of the competent authority i.e the Secretary, Tourism and Cultural Affairs, Government of Punjab. recorded in the ACR of the respondent were not communicated to her. She was promoted in the year 2001. There was no denial to the existence of letter dated 04.09.2001 by the appellants, which was unsigned and vide order dated no opportunity of being heard was given to her while passing the impugned orders. dated 04.09.2001 which was marked as Ex P1, vide which her services were put to an end by retiring her prematurely on 04.09.2001. This order was unsigned. The appellants did not deny the existence of dated 04.09.2001 but stated that order is not available and when Narinder xamined as DW1, he did not deny the existence of letter dated 04.09.2001.The respondent was actually prematurely retired on 18.07.2002i.e almost one year after posting of letter dated 04.09.2001 (Ex P1). Thereafter, certain of the respondent from duty were made. The Addl. Secretary, Addl. Affairs and Director Tourism, Punjab has written letter to the Secretary to Government of Punjab, Department of Tourism, Chandigarh on 2002, which is exhibited as PW2/B.The same is reproduced as under:- "Considering the submission and her claim, it is worth while to note that the Deputy Director Tourism who had processed the whole case to got retired prematurely the petitioner, could not give me the he proposal in the Office of the Director Tourism in a right way alongwith this it is pertinent to note that the claim submitted by the petitioner has been supported by the various Annexure as enclosed here. So prima facie it appears that the Deputy or Tourism had mislead and misinformed, the Director in passing the order regarding the premature retirement of Mrs. Usha Ohri, formal As per record, order pertaining to premature retirement of the approval of the competent authority i.e the Secretary, Tourism and Cultural Affairs, Government of Punjab. Further that in the ACR of the respondent were not communicated to he year 2001. There was no denial to the existence of letter dated 04.09.2001 by the appellants, which was unsigned and vide order dated . Ex P1, vide which her services were put to an end by retiring her prematurely on did not deny the existence of dated 04.09.2001 but stated that order is not available and when Narinder xamined as DW1, he did not deny the existence of letter dated i.e . Thereafter, certain of the respondent from duty were made. The Addl. Secretary, Addl. Affairs and Director Tourism, Punjab has written letter to the Secretary to Government of Punjab, Department of Tourism, Chandigarh on As per record, order pertaining to premature retirement of the approval of the competent authority i.e the that in the ACR of the respondent were not communicated to he year 2001. There was no denial to the existence of letter dated 04.09.2001 by the appellants, which was unsigned and vide order dated Gaurav Arora 2025.08.20 19:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-1179-2009 4 18.07.2002, she was prematurely retired. Reversion of Tourist Officer, vide order da reply was filed by the respondent. The reply filed by the respondent was not even considered. She was placed under suspension on 11.0 was reinstated, vide order dated 16.07.2002. Afte work and conduct of the respondent was found to be not satisfactory and premature retirement was passed against her without giving any show cause notice and without following the principles of natural justice. 8. A perusal of the record further shows that there is no base of any of the orders and no respondent. Even the reply filed by her was not considered. A perusal of the dates of the impugned orders show 9. In view of the above, I do not find any infirmity in the decree dated 22.11.2006 passed by learned Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.) Amritsar as well as judgment and decree dated 05.11.2008 passed by learned Addl. District Judge, Amritsar regular second appeal is dismissed. 10. Parties are left to bear their own costs. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly. 11. Pending application (s) if any also stands disposed of. July 28, 2025 Gaurav Arora 09 18.07.2002, she was prematurely retired. Reversion Officer, vide order day 06.03.2002 is passed on the same date when reply was filed by the respondent. The reply filed by the respondent was not even considered. She was placed under suspension on 11.0 was reinstated, vide order dated 16.07.2002. Afte work and conduct of the respondent was found to be not satisfactory and retirement was passed against her without giving any show cause notice and without following the principles of natural justice. A perusal of the record further shows that there is no base of any of the orders and no show cause notice and personal hearing was given to the respondent. Even the reply filed by her was not considered. A perusal of the dates of the impugned orders show that they are passed without any application of mind. In view of the above, I do not find any infirmity in the decree dated 22.11.2006 passed by learned Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.) Amritsar as well as judgment and decree dated 05.11.2008 passed by learned Addl. District Judge, Amritsar and the same are appeal is dismissed. Parties are left to bear their own costs. Decree sheet be prepared Pending application (s) if any also stands disposed of. (SUDEEPTI SHARMA Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable 18.07.2002, she was prematurely retired. Reversion of the respondent from the post 06.03.2002 is passed on the same date when reply was filed by the respondent. The reply filed by the respondent was not even considered. She was placed under suspension on 11.07.2002 and after 05 days, she was reinstated, vide order dated 16.07.2002. After 02 days i.e on 18.07.2002, the work and conduct of the respondent was found to be not satisfactory and order of retirement was passed against her without giving any show cause notice and without following the principles of natural justice. A perusal of the record further shows that there is no base of any of show cause notice and personal hearing was given to the respondent. Even the reply filed by her was not considered. A perusal of the dates that they are passed without any application of mind. In view of the above, I do not find any infirmity in the judgment and decree dated 22.11.2006 passed by learned Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.) Amritsar as well as judgment and decree dated 05.11.2008 passed by learned upheld. Accordingly, the present Parties are left to bear their own costs. Decree sheet be prepared Pending application (s) if any also stands disposed of. SUDEEPTI SHARMA) JUDGE : Yes : Yes from the post 06.03.2002 is passed on the same date when reply was filed by the respondent. The reply filed by the respondent was not even .2002 and after 05 days, she r 02 days i.e on 18.07.2002, the order of retirement was passed against her without giving any show cause notice A perusal of the record further shows that there is no base of any of show cause notice and personal hearing was given to the respondent. Even the reply filed by her was not considered. A perusal of the dates judgment and decree dated 22.11.2006 passed by learned Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.) Amritsar as well as judgment and decree dated 05.11.2008 passed by learned the present Parties are left to bear their own costs. Decree sheet be prepared Gaurav Arora 2025.08.20 19:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document