R.B.MISRA,J. - (1.) HEARD Sri Ashok Khare learned senior Advocate with Sri Sanjeev Kumar Gupta on behalf of learned Counsel for the petitioner.
(2.) IN this writ petition the order dated 5 -10 -96 has been challenged whereby for involvement of the petitioner in alleged irregularities in working he was awarded adverse entry with remarks and stopping of three increments cumulatively with further indication that in the interest of public, the petitioner shall not be kept on a post of responsibility. Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1930 as applicable in Uttar Pradesh in para 55(1) provides as below: “55. (1) Without prejudice to the provisions of Public Servant Inquires Act, 1850 an order (other than an order based on facts which had led to his conviction in a criminal Court or by a Court material) of dismissal, removal or reduction in rank (which includes reduction to a lower post or time scale, or to a lower stage in a time scale but excludes the reversion to a lower post of a person who is officiating in a higher post) shall be passed on a person who is a member of a Civil Service, or holds a civil post under the State unless he has been informed in writing of the grounds on which it is proposed to take action and has been afforded on adequate opportunity of defending himself. The ground on which it is proposed to take action shall be reduced in the form of a definite charge or charges which shall be communicated to the person charged and which shall be so clear and precise as to give sufficient indication to the charged Government servant of the facts and circumstances against him. He shall be required, within a reasonable time to put in a written statement of his defence and to state whether he desires to be heard in person. If he so desired, or if the authority concerned so directs, an oral inquiry shall be held in respect of such of the allegation as are not admitted. At that inquiry such oral evidence will be heard as the inquiring officer considers necessary. The person charged shall be entitled to cross -examine the witnesses to give evidence in person and to have such witnesses called as he may with, provided that the officer conducting the inquiry may for sufficient reason to be recorded in writing refuse to call a witness. The proceedings shall contain a sufficient record of the evidence and statement of the findings and the ground thereof. The officer conducting the inquiry may also separately from these proceedings make his own recommendation regarding the punishment to be imposed on the charged Government servant.”
(3.) PARA 55 -B of Rules, 1930 above provides as below: “55 -B(a) Whenever the punishing authority is satisfied that good and sufficient reasons exist for adopting such a course it may impose the penalty of : (i) censure, or (ii) stoppage at an efficiency - bar : Provided that it shall not be necessary to frame formal charges against the Government servant concerned or to call for his explanation. (b) In all cases where a punishing authority imposes the penalty of - (i) withholding increments in the time -scale at stages where there is no efficiency bar, or (ii) recovery from pay of the whole or part of any pecuniary loss caused to State Government by negligence or breach of orders. For proceeding embodying a statement of the offence or fault, the explanation of the person concerned and the reasons for the punishment shall be recorded: Provided that it shall not be necessary to record such proceedings in cases where a Government servants increment in the time scale of his pay, at any stage other than an efficiency bar, is stopped due to this integrity remaining uncertified. ;