- (1.) HEARD Sri Shailendra Kumar Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioner. Learned Standing Counsel appears for the State respondents.
(2.) THE State Public Services Tribunal, Lucknow has dismissed the Claim Petition filed by the petitioner against the censure entry dated 17.6.1994 and the order dated 23.12.1995, by which the representation of the petitioner was rejected as barred by limitation under Section 5 of the U.P. Public Services (Tribunal) Act, 1976, giving rise to this writ petition. Brief facts stated in the claim petition are that at the relevant time the petitioner was posted at Ballia on the post of Entertainment Tax Inspector Grade -II. A charge sheet was given to him for shortfall in the deposits of entertainment tax as compared to cent percent and 11.02% less in comparison to previous years. The petitioner submitted a reply to the charge sheet dated 22.12.1993 stating that all the five cinema halls in his jurisdiction were getting benefit of the subsidy scheme. The district was affected by drought and that the dish antennas and video cassettes had affected the business of cinema. Besides in November 1993 87.74% collection was made.
(3.) A departmental enquiry was held in which, it is alleged, that without issuing further show cause notice after receiving the enquiry report an order of punishment was passed in mechanical manner. The petitioner's representation was also rejected on 23.12.1995, without giving any reasons.;