V.N. Khare, J. - (1.) By means of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution the petitioner, who is a professor and Head of Department of Applied Sciences in the College known as Madan Mohan Malviya Engineering College, Gorakhpur (hereinafter referred to as the College) challenges the minor punishments awarded to him by order dated 12th June, 1991.
(2.) The College is fully owned and controlled by the State Government and run by the society knows as Madan Mohan Malviya Engineering College Society (hereinafter referred to as Society). The College imparts education in different branches of Engineering and Technology and is affiliated to the Gorakhpur University.
(3.) The petitioner was initially appointed as Associate Lecturer in the department of Applied Sciences and subsequently was promoted to the post of Reader and thereafter became professor in the department of Applied Sciences. A inspection committee visited the College on 1st and 2nd of the February, 1991 and in that connection various Heads of the departments including petitioner submitted reports containing their achievements shortcomings and demands etc., before the Inspection Committee. During this meeting, petitioner alleges that a member of the Committee used indecent language to which he objected and pressed him to tender apology. Whereas {he case of the respondents is that in fact it was the petitioner, who misbehaved much with Dr. A.K. Vashistha and used indecent words and acted in indisciplined manner, with the result the Committee could not complete the inspection. We need not go into this controversy as it is subject matter of departmental enquiry. It appears that due to that incident which took place before the inspection committee petitioner was suspended by order dated 6th February, 1990, as the respondents contemplated to hold a departmental disciplinary proceeding against him. Subsequently the petitioner was served with a charge-sheet dated 19/21st February, 1991. By the said charge-sheet petitioner was required to furnish his explanation to the charges levelled against him before the Inquiry Officer. Petitioner was further informed that if he wants to avail opportunity of personal hearing or to examine witnesses in his defence, he may inform in respect thereof to the Inquiry Officer. The petitioner on 3rd March, 1991 submitted an explanation to the charges levelled against him and in the said explanation he expressed his desire to avail opportunity of personal hearing as well as examine and cross examine the witnesses. It appears that after the receipt of the explanation, the Inquiry Officer submitted his report to the State Government without giving any opportunity to the petitioner of personal hearing or opportunity to examine witnesses in his defence. It further appears that the State Government agreed with the report of Inquiry Officer and inflicted minor punishments to the petitioner in respect of his indecent behaviour with the members of the Inspection Committee by order dated 12th June, 1991. It is this order which is impugned in this petition. By the impugned order the three minor punishments were awarded to the petitioner. Firstly one increment of the petitioner has been withheld permanently, secondly an adverse entry and warning was directed to be incorporated in the Character roll of the petitioner and thirdly in future the petitioner was relieved from the office of the Head of department, being not competent to occupy the said office.;