- (1.) M. Katju, J. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel.
(2.) THIS writ petition has been filed against the impugned order of the U. P. Public Services Tribunal dated 4-6-2001, the order of dismissal dated 15-1-1994 as well as appellate order dated 21-1-1995, vide Annexures 1, 10 and 12 to the writ petition. The petitioner was appointed as an Additional Child Warder at District Jail, Jhansi. The Deputy Jailor made a complaint against the petitioner and one Rajendra Prasad Tiwari on 20-9-1992, vide Annexure-2 to the writ petition in which it was alleged that the petitioner and one Rajendra Prasad Tiwari has abused the Deputy Jailor, who was their superior. Thereafter, the petitioner was given a charge-sheet dated 20-11-1992, vide Annexure-6 to the writ petition and after enquiry a report dated 28-5-1993 was submitted by the Enquiry Officer, vide Annexure-8 to the writ petition. On the basis of the enquiry report petitioner's service was terminated and his appeal was also dismissed. He filed a claim petition No. 2256 of 1995, which was also dismissed. The finding of the Tribunal is a finding of fact and we cannot interfere with the same. In so far as the punishment is concerned in our opinion the same is disproportionate to the offence. The allegation against the petitioner is that he abused his superior. There is no averment that the petitioner physically assaulted his superior or committed some such grave act of misconduct. There is a difference between abusing and physically assaulting. It is said in English that "words break no bones". In other words, abusing a person does not cause physical hurt. However, it may certainly hurt his feelings and it may be an act of insubordination. Be that as it may in our opinion the extreme sentence of dismissal is too harsh for the misconduct of abuse. Nowadays it very often happens in society that people lose their temper and utter improper words which they should not, but that is a lesser offence than physical assault. It is well-settled in service law that the punishment should be proportionate to the offence.
(3.) IN Ved Prakash Gupta v. M/s. Delton Cable INdia (P) Ltd. , (1984) 2 SCC 569, the worker had abused a coworker in filthy language and hence he was given punishment of dismissal. The Supreme Court observed that the punishment awarded is shockingly disproportionate to the charge. Similarly in Rama Kant Misra v. State of U. P. , AIR 1982 SC 1552, the Supreme Court observed that abusive language may show lack of culture but mere use of such language on one occasion unconnected with any subsequent positive action and not preceded by any blameworthy conduct cannot justify the extreme penalty of dismissal from service. Following the said decisions this writ petition is allowed. The impugned order of the Tribunal dated 4- 6-2001 as well as the order of dismissal dated 15-1-1994 and the order dated 21-1-1995 dismissing the appeal of the petitioner are quashed.;