Govt Dispensary In-Charge Responsible For Records, Can't Blame Subordinate: Rajasthan High Court Upholds Doctor's Compulsory Retirement
While upholding penalty imposed on an in-charge of a Government Ayurvedic Dispensary, Rajasthan High Court observed that failure on part of the petitioner's subordinate in carrying out his duties, did not absolve the petitioner from all his responsibilities, especially when nothing on record suggested any action taken against the subordinate.The bench of Justice Anand Sharma was hearing...
While upholding penalty imposed on an in-charge of a Government Ayurvedic Dispensary, Rajasthan High Court observed that failure on part of the petitioner's subordinate in carrying out his duties, did not absolve the petitioner from all his responsibilities, especially when nothing on record suggested any action taken against the subordinate.
The bench of Justice Anand Sharma was hearing challenge against the penalty of compulsory retirement imposed against the petitioner over the allegations of issuing irregular sickness/fitness certificate to another government servant.
The petitioner was working as an in-charge of the Government Ayurved Dispensary, Kishanpur, Berath, when a charge sheet was issued against him.
The allegations against him were that he misused his powers and issued around 24 sickness certificates in favour of an employee to prove his sickness/fitness, that covered a period of almost 2 years.
One of the arguments raised by the petitioner was that the charges did not relate to his competence to issue the certificates but were in relation to the fact that those were not entered into the register maintained at the Government dispensary.
In this regard, the petitioner submitted that it was not his duty to make such entries but of his subordinate-compounder.
In relation to the aforementioned argument, the Court observed,
“…suffice is to observe that admittedly, the petitioner was holding the charge of the Government Dispensary and was responsible for each and every entry in the record of the Dispensary, which was required to be made in accordance with the rules and guidelines. The petitioner cannot raise a plea that since, his subordinate failed to carry out his duties, therefore, petitioner is required to be absolved of all his responsibility. Even otherwise, nothing has been placed on record by the petitioner to demonstrate that any point of time, he ever served any show cause notice to his subordinate for not carrying out his duties properly.”
Similarly, while rejecting other arguments raised by the petitioner, the petition was accordingly dismissed.
For petitioners: Mr. Rajendra Yadav, Adv.; Ms. Anisha Yadav, Adv.
For Respondents: Mr. Archit Bohra, AGC; Mr. Vinod Kumar Gupta, AGC