R.H.Zaidi, J. - (1.) By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner prays for issuance of writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 2.8.1988 whereby he was reverted from the post of Clerk to the post of Process Server by the District Judge, Faizabad. Subsequently, by means of amendment in the writ petition the validity of the order dated 1.2.1994 passed by the High Court dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner on administrative side was also challenged by him.
(2.) The relevant facts of the case giving rise to the present petition, in brief, are that the petitioner was initially appointed as a Peon in the judgeship of Faizabad. Subsequently, he was promoted to a Class III post. At the relevant time the petitioner was officiating as Record Keeper when the records of Original Suit No. 52 of 1981, decided on 20.2.1953 and First Appeal No. 95 of 1953, decided on 9.12.1953, which were kept in the Record Room. An application was filed by an advocate in another case for summoning the aforesaid records. On the said application, the records were searched out in the Record Room but the some could not be traced out and were reported to be missing. However, a slip written in the handwriting of the petitioner was found in the Basta wherein it was noted that the files of the said cases were sent of the Copying Department. Even in the Copying Department the said records were not found. The matter was thereafter reported by the Officer-in-charge to the District Judge on 3.9.1980. The District Judge on the basis of the said report appointed an enquiry officer to enquire into the matter and ultimately appointed one Sri Yashwant Singh Sengar, Munsif, Sadar, Fizabad, as enquiry officer to conduct the preliminary enquiry about the aforesaid files. Mr. Sengar after following the procedure prescribed under the law conducted the enquiry and thereafter reported that the petitioner was responsible for the loss of the said files. On receipt of the report of the preliminary enquiry, the District Judge appointed enquiry officer and directed to conduct departmental enquiry against the petitioner. The enquiry officer appointed by the District Judge on the basis of the material on record framed charges against the petitioner and communicated to him calling upon him to submit his explanation. The petitioner on receipt of notice along with the charge-sheet submitted his explanation denying the said charges and has thereafter produced evidence in support of his case. The enquiry officer after affording an opportunity of hearing and after perusing the material on record, recording finding of guilt against the petitioner with respect to the loss of the records of the aforesaid cases and submitted the report to the District Judge. On the basis of the findings recorded against the petitioner, after receipt of the enquiry report of the enquiry office the District Judge again afforded an opportunity to the petitioner and thereafter passed the order dated 2.8.1988 whereby the petitioner was reverted from the post of Clerk to the post of Process Server, taking a lenient view in the matter. Challenging the validity of the aforesaid order, the petitioner filed the present petitioner in this court. The writ petition filed by the petitioner was admitted and notices were directed to be issued to opposite parties. On the other hand, the petitioner also filed an appeal before the High Court on administrative side against the said order. The appeal filed by the petitioner was heard by the Hon'ble Mr. Justice B.M. Lal and Hon'ble Mrs. Justice V.N. Mehrotra. The High Court also affirmed the findings recorded by the District Judge and dismissed the appeal by its judgment and order dated 1.2.1994. Thereafter, the writ petition was got amended whereby the validity of the order passed by the High Court was also challenged. The amendment application was allowed and the amendments sought by the petitioner were also incorporated in the writ petition.
(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner vehemently urged that the order passed by the District Judge was against the principle of natural justice and the same was also in violation of the Subordinate Staff Civil Service (Control Classification and Appeal) Rules. It was also urged that the order of punishment was passed in violation of Articles 14,16,21 and 311 of the Constitution of India and the order passed by the High Court was also challenged on the ground that it did not consider the fact that during the pendency of the appeal before the High Court, the relevant records were traced out from another Basta. According to the petitioner, aforesaid records were misplaced in the Record Room by inadvertence of the Record Keeper, therefore, the petitioner should not have been punished for the same. It was also urged that the allegation relating to previous punishments could not be considered in awarding the punishment in the present proceedings against the petitioner and that the petitioner could not be permanently debarred from being considered for promotion.;