Decided on July 05,2012

State of U.P. and others Respondents


- (1.) Heard Sri Manav Sharma, the learned counsel for the petitioner. List has been revised. Mrs. Beena Pandey, Standing Counsel appears for the State of U.P. No one appears for the U.P. State Textile Corporation Limited. The present petition has a chequered history and it would be appropriate if the facts are narrated in a nutshell.
(2.) In the year 1990, the petitioner was working as a Reeling-Winding-Incharge in the Kashipur Unit of the U.P. State Textile Corporation Limited. The Chief Executive of the Kashipur Unit for reasons best known to him bore a grudge against the petitioner and issued an order of dismissal dated 15/12/1990 without issuing a show cause notice or a chargesheet. No opportunity was provided to the petitioner. The petitioner, being aggrieved by the order of dismissal dated 15/12/1990, filed writ petition No. 33193 of 1990 before the Allahabad High Court in which an interim order dated 26th July, 1991 was passed staying the effect and operation of the order of dismissal. The Court further directed the respondents that he would be entitled for his salary during the pendency of the writ petition.
(3.) Subsequently, the respondents presumably realizing the mistake issued a chargesheet to the petitioner on 3rd October, 1991 on which basis a domestic inquiry was initiated. The Inquiry Officer, after giving an opportunity to the petitioner to defend himself, submitted his inquiry report. Based on this inquiry report, the disciplinary authority passed a fresh order of dismissal dated 6th April, 1992. The petitioner, being aggrieved by the fresh order of dismissal, filed writ petition No. 12663 of 1992 which was allowed by a judgment of the Allahabad High Court dated 3rd August, 1999. The writ court held that the order of dismissal was passed in violation of the principle of natural justice since a copy of the inquiry report was not supplied and, accordingly, allowed the writ petition and quashed the order of dismissal directing the respondents to reinstate the petitioner in service and further decide the question of arrears of salary. For facility, the operative portion of the judgment dated 3rd August, 1999 passed by the Allahabad High Court is extracted herein : "The writ petition succeeds and is allowed. The order of dismissal dated 06.04.1992 Annexure-21 to the writ petition passed by respondent no. 3 is quashed. The respondents are directed to reinstate the petitioner in service within a period of 15 days from the date a certified copy of this order is served upon to the respondents. The respondents are further directed to decide the question of arrears of salary, which is to be paid to the petitioner within a period of one month thereafter.";

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.