2025:UHC:6198-DB Reserved on: 01.07.2025 Delivered on: 16.07.2025 HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition Service Bench No. 232 of 2019 State of Uttarakhand & Others --Petitioners Versus Tarun Chaudhary --Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------- --- Presence:- Mr. P.S. Bisht, learned Addl. C.S.C. for the State/ petitioners. Mr. D.S. Mehta, learned counsel for the respondent. ------------------------------------------------------------------- --- Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Hon’ble Subhash Upadhyay, J. (Per: Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) JUDGMENT State has filed this writ petition challenging judgment dated 07.08.2018 rendered by Uttarakhand Public Service Tribunal in Claim Petition No.35/NB/DB/2016. By the impugned judgment, claim petition filed by respondent challenging punishment order whereby he was placed at minimum salary for one year as affirmed by Appellate Authority, was set aside and the Appointing Authority was directed to issue afresh charge-sheet to the delinquent (respondent herein). The operative portion of the impugned judgment is extracted herein below:- “ORDER The claim petition is hereby allowed. The punishment order dated 13.05.2016 (Annexure No.1) and rejection of appeal by the appellate authority dated 27.07.2016 (Annexure No.A-3) are set aside with the effect and operation of these orders. Let the appointing authority give a charge sheet to the 1 2025:UHC:6198-DB delinquent, as per law, afresh. Fate of Annexure:A-2 will depend upon the outcome of the departmental proceedings, which will be conducted against the petitioner. Let a copy of this judgment be sent to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Nainital for compliance of this order, as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law. It is made clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. No order as to costs.” 2. Learned Tribunal found fault with the procedure adopted by Police Authorities while initiating disciplinary proceedings against respondent and held that issuance of charge-sheet by Inquiry Officer was not in order. For arriving at this conclusion, learned Tribunal relied upon orders passed by this Court in three different writ petitions of which ‘Smt. Lalita Verma Vs. State of Uttarakhand and another’, is the leading case. In that case, while passing interim order, Co-ordinate Bench considered provisions of Uttaranchal Government Servants (Discipline, Appeal) Rules 2003 and observed that issuance of charge-sheet by Inquiry Officer is not proper and it is the Disciplinary Authority who is required to issue the charge-sheet. 3. Although disciplinary inquiry against subordinate police officers is governed by U.P. Police Officers of Subordinate Rank (Punishment and Appeal) Rules 1991, as applicable in State of Uttarakhand and the said Rules are silent regarding the authority competent to issue charge-sheet, however, observation made by Division Bench of this Court in ‘Smt. Lalita Verma Vs. State of Uttarakhand and another’, may be of some relevance in the matter of disciplinary inquiry 2 2025:UHC:6198-DB against subordinate police officers. Since by the impugned judgment the matter has been remitted back to the Disciplinary Authority to issue charge-sheet afresh to the respondent, therefore, we refrain from examining correctness of the view taken by learned Tribunal and the question of law is left open. 4. For the aforesaid reasons, we dispose of the writ petition with direction to the Disciplinary Authority to issue charge-sheet to respondent within three weeks from today and conclude disciplinary inquiry within six months from date of presentation of certified copy of this order. (Subhash Upadhyay, J.) (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 16.07.2025 SS 3