RAJIV SHARMA,J. - (1.) THIS writ petition has been filed by the petitioner against the order dated 15.12.2007 whereby the services of the petitioner were terminated. Petitioner has also assailed the order dated 21.4.2009 where by the appeal of the petitioner was also rejected.
(2.) THE petitioner was appointed as a Bandi Rakshak in the year2005. While the petitioner was posted at Nari Bandi Niketan(Adarsh Karagar), Lucknow, she was issued a show cause notice from the office of Senior Superintendent, Adarsh Karagar,Lucknow on 23.10.2007 to show cause with regard to the Sports Certificate produced by him at the time of seeking appointment.The petitioner submitted his reply within the time granted. All of a sudden by the impugned order dated 15.12.2007, the services of the petitioner have been terminated. The submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner,besides others, is that no formal inquiry was ever conducted in the matter nor any enquiry report was submitted and prior to the passing of the impugned order, no opportunity was given to him and thus the procedure as laid down under the U.P. Government Servants (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1999 with regard to imposition of major penalty has not been followed. Rule 7 of the 1999 Rules lays down the procedure for imposing major penalty. The same categorically provides that before imposing any major penalty on a government servant an enquiry shall be held. The manner in which the enquiry is to be held has been clearly given in the said rule. If the charges not admitted by the charged employee, the enquiry officer is required to record oral and documentary evidence and submit his report. On completion of enquiry, a report is to be submitted to the disciplinary authority along with all the records of the enquiry. Therefore, if the disciplinary authority is of the view that any penalty is to be imposed, a copy of the enquiry report is to be given the charged employee who may be required to submit his representation within a reasonable time. In the present case, the respondents in the counter affidavit have not stated that any enquiry report was submitted and thus the question of giving opportunity to the petitioner to file his representation against the enquiry report does not arise. Thus, it is clear the procedure as laid down under the Rules of 1999 has not been complied with by the respondents prior to the passing of the impugned order. The orders thus deserve to be set-aside.
(3.) ACCORDINGLY , the writ petition is allowed and the impugned orders dated 15.12.2007 and 21.4.2009 are hereby quashed. The petitioner shall be entitled to all consequential benefits. However, it is made clear that the respondents shall be at liberty to pass fresh order, in accordance with law, after complying with the procedure as laid down in the Rules of 1999.;