M.KATJU AND RAKESH TIWARI, JJ. - (1.) THIS writ petition has been filed against the impugned order dated 8/9.2.2000, Annexure -7 to the petition and for a mandamus directing respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to make payment of salary, allowances etc.
(2.) THE petitioner was appointed as Assistant Accounts Officer, Rasra, district Ballia in the service of the U. P. State Yarn Company Ltd. vide order dated 25.7.1987, Annexure -1 to the writ petition. The petitioner was subsequently given the work as Accounts Officer vide order dated 13.9.1991, Annexure -2 to the writ petition in addition to his duty till the joining of the new incumbent. Subsequently, he was transferred to the Head Office by the order dated 25.9.1993 vide Annexure -3 to the writ petition. He was then assigned duty as Stores Purchase Officer vide order dated 11.6.1993 and subsequently, transferred to the Banda Unit vide order dated 29.7.1997, Annexure -5 to the writ petition. The petitioner was suspended by order dated 19.9.1998 and an enquiry was initiated against him vide order dated 19.9.1998, Annexure -6 to the writ petition. Thereafter the impugned order dated 8/9.2.2000 was passed by which the petitioner was reinstated but given punishment of withholding two annual increments from 1.10.1998 without cumulative effect. It was also directed that in addition to subsistence allowance, no other benefit will be paid to the petitioner during the suspension period. Again that order, this writ petition has been filed.
(3.) A counter -affidavit has been filed by the respondent Nos. 1 and 2. In para 4 of the counter -affidavit, it is stated that the company was declared sick by the B.I.F.R. in the year 1992 and the proceedings are still pending before the Board. At present, three out of four manufacturing units of the company are lying permanently closed. In para 5 of the counter -affidavit, it is stated that the petitioner was directed to work as Stores Purchase Officer but he was never promoted to that post nor paid the pay scale of that post. In para 7, it is stated that the enquiry officer held enquiry and found all charges levelled against the petitioner to be established. However, he recommended withholding of two increments without cumulative effect and this report was accepted by the disciplinary authority. In para 8 of the counter -affidavit, it is stated that full opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioner. In para 9, it is stated that the manufacturing activities in Banda Unit of the company were stopped some time in December, 1998, due to severe financial crisis. On account of non -availability of funds, none of the employees of the unit were paid any salary. Still the petitioner was paid subsistence allowance upto February, 1999. It is further stated that the respondent company is making efforts to arrange for the funds and in this connection, the company has also approached the State Government to provide adequate funds to make payment to the employees. A copy of the letter dated 1.2.2002, is Annexure -C.A. 1 to the counter -affidavit. In para 12 of the counter -affidavit, it is stated that the petitioner was not entitled for any show cause or copy of any enquiry report as there exist no provision for the same in the Service Bye -laws. In para 16, it is stated that services of the petitioner were terminated on account of closure of the unit in accordance with the provisions of the Service Bye -laws. It is further stated that the service of the petitioner was terminated along with other officers of the unit as the said unit was permanently closed down w.e.f. 10.2.2000. The petitioner cannot be permitted to challenge the closure after a lapse of more than 2 years.;