PRADEEP KANT,R.R.AWASTHI,J - (1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) THE respondent being aggrieved by an order of punishment of stoppage of three annual increments permanently and withholding of integrity with a censure entry, approached the State Public Services Tribunal under Section-4 of the Act. The matter was contested by the State Government. The Tribunal came to the conclusion that so far the award of stoppage of three annual increments permanently is concerned, that could not be sustained as no enquiry in accordance with law was held before inflicting the said punishment. However, the Tribunal did not interfere with the rest of the punishment with respect to withholding of integrity with a censure entry. The Tribunal found that after submission of the reply to the charge sheet, the delinquent was not afforded adequate opportunity and, therefore, the proceedings are vitiated.
(3.) MS . Aruna Misra, learned counsel for the State, assailing the aforesaid order submitted that since after submission of reply to the charge sheet, a date was fixed for personal hearing of the respondent, wherein he stated that he does not want to add anything to the reply already submitted, therefore, it cannot be said that opportunity of hearing was not afforded to the respondent and that the enquiry was not conducted in accordance with law. The argument is that the Tribunal has committed a manifest error in taking a contrary view.;