Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

GULAB CHANDRA versus STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Gulab Chandra v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - A No. 71446 of 2005 [2005] RD-AH 6040 (21 November 2005)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

HON. ARUN TANDON, J.

Heard Sri Gautam Chaudhary on behalf of the petitioner, Standing Counsel on behalf of the respondents.

Petitioner, who is working as Collection Amin, is aggrieved by an order of punishment dated 16th September, 2005 where under major penalty of reversion to the initial of the pay scale as well as recording of the adverse entry has been directed.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the report of the enquiry officer dated 3rd September, 2005 was never forwarded to the petitioner by the disciplinary authority nor the provisions of Rule 9 of the U.P. Government Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1999 has been complied with and therefore the impugned order of punishment cannot be legally sustained.

Standing Counsel on behalf of the respondents fairly conceded that from the order impugned it is apparently clear that the disciplinary authority has not taken note of Rule 9 before imposing the major penalty of reversion to the initial of pay scale and therefore it would be appropriate that the disciplinary authority  may be required to act strictly in accordance with the provisions of U.P. Government Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1999 specifically rule 9.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, admittedly there has been violation of Rule 10 of the U.P. Government Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1999, as such impugned order of punishment dated 16.9.2005 is legally not sustainable and is hereby quashed.

The disciplinary authority is directed to proceed against the petitioner from the stage the proceedings have run contrary to the law, referred to herein above, and act strictly in accordance with Rules 7 to 9 of the U.P. Government Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1999  and to complete the disciplinary proceedings in that regard, preferably within four months from the date a certified copy of this order is filed before the authority concerned. The disciplinary authority shall pass a reasoned speaking order.

Writ petition is accordingly allowed subject to the observations made herein above.      

21.11.2005

Pkb/71446


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.