V.K. Shukla, J. - (1.) PETITIONER has rushed to this Court questioning the validity of order dated 15.06.2008 passed by Senior Superintendent of Police, Varanasi, reverting the petitioner, the order dated 30.08.2008 passed by Deputy Inspector general of Police, Varanasi Range, Varanasi and the order dated 29.11.2008 passed by Inspector General of Police, Varanasi Zone, Varanasi, affirming the order of punishment in appeal and revision respectively.
(2.) THE petitioner had been recruited as constable in civil police on 01.10.1985, and since then he had been in continuous service and remained posted in various districts. While he was posted at Police Station Rohania, District Varanasi, the petitioner was attached to discharge duties at Vishwanath Temple from 27.04.2004 to 04.10.2004. With regard to allegation that the petitioner was absent from duty on 25.09.2004, a report was submitted by Sri Rama Shankar Dwivedi, Dy. Superintendent of Police, Gyanvapi Security to the Additional Superintendent of Police, Gyanvapi Security, Varanasi. Said report was forwarded to Senior Superintendent of Police, Varanasi vide letter dated 25.09.2004, and therein preliminary inquiry was directed to be conducted by Sri Lal Bharat Kumar, Dy. Superintendent of Police, Gyanvapi Security, who submitted report on 10.11.2004, recommending departmental proceedings against the petitioner. Based on the said preliminary enquiry report, charge sheet was issued to the petitioner on 13.06.2005. Petitioner submitted his reply on 02.07.2005 specifically denying the allegations. Thereafter Circle Officer, Cantonment, Varanasi was appointed Inquiry Officer. During the course of enquiry he recorded statements of Ram Lalit Yadav, Arun Kumar Srivastava, Chhote Lal Gupta, Pratap chan Singh, Rama Shankar Updhyaya, Jai Prakash Yadav, Suresh Singh, Ravi Kumar Sharma, Bal Govind Krishna Tripathi, Basudev Yadav, Bharat Kumar Pal and Rama Shankar Dwivedi as prosecution witnesses against the petitioner. On 31.03.2008 the Inquiry Officer submitted 2 his report indicting the petitioner, and copy of the said report was supplied to the petitioner along with a show cause notice to show case as to why the petitioner be not reverted to the minimum of his pay scale for a period of three years under Rule 4 of the U.P. Police Officers of Subordinate Rank (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1999. The aforesaid show cause notice was objected to by the petitioner by filing reply on 03.06.2008. Thereafter, the Senior Superintendent of Police proceeded to inflict the penalty of reversion to the minimum of his pay scale for a period of three years. Aggrieved, petitioner filed appeal, which was dismissed vide order dated 30.08.2008. Revision filed by the petitioner against the said appellate order has also been dismissed vide order dated 29.11.2008. At this juncture, petitioner has approached this Court. Pleadings inter se parties have been exchanged, and thereafter present writ petition has been taken up for final hearing and disposal with the consent of the parties.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner contended with vehemence that in the present case while taking disciplinary proceedings, principle of natural justice has been flouted with impunity, as recording of the statements of two witnesses, has been done behind his back with no right to cross examine and further the Inquiry Officer has also taken into account the past conduct of the petitioner, without providing any opportunity, and the punishment which has been so awarded, is not at all commensurate to the charges so levelled against the petitioner, as such writ petition deserves to be allowed.;