- (1.) Heard Sri Satya Prakash Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Pradeep Kumar for respondent. By this petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 10.2.2003 passed by the District Judge, Allahabad contained in Annexure-5 of the writ petition, whereby petitioner's services were terminated in purported exercise of power under the provisions of Uttar Pradesh Temporary Government Servants (Termination of Service) Rules, 1975 (hereinafter referred to as '1975 Rules') indicating that he will get 30 days' wage/salary in lieu of 30 days notice under the said Rules.
(2.) It is stated that the petitioner was appointed on the post of Driver by the District Judge, Allahabad on 26.10.1996 after due selection in pursuance of advertisement issued in the year 1996. Since the date of his appointment the petitioner was continuously working on the said post. On 21.10.2002 he was convicted in Session Trial No. 202 of 1999 by Additional Session Judge, Allahabad u/S. 366 and 376, I.P.C. wherein he was sentenced for 3 years and 7 years imprisonment and fine of Rs. 3000/- and Rs. 5000/- total Rs. 8000/- was also awarded against him. Feeling aggrieved against which the petitioner has preferred Criminal Appeal No. 4563 of 2002 before this Court, wherein on 25.10.2002 the operation of judgment and order dated 21.10.2002 appealed against passed by Trail court has been stayed and the petitioner was also released on bail. Initially the petitioner was placed under suspension vide order dated 23.10.2002 intending to hold inquiry against him on account of his detention for a period of more than 48 hours. Thereafter a preliminary inquiry was held against the petitioner by Additional District Judge, Allahabad, who submitted his report 29.1.2003 to the District Judge, Allahabad, thereupon the District Judge, Allahabad after going through the said inquiry report has passed an order dated 4.2.2003 intending to terminate the services of the petitioner under 1975 Rules. The copy of preliminary inquiry report dated 29.1.2003 and order dated 4.2.2003 passed by the District Judge, Allahabad are on record as Annexures-2 and 1 respectively to the counter-affidavit filed in the writ petition on behalf of the respondent.
(3.) It would be useful to quote the order dated 4.2.2003 passed by the District Judge, Allahabad contained in C.A.-1 as under: Sri Sada Nand Yadav Driver working in Civil Court had been convicted by Addl. Sessions Judge, Court No. 18 on 21.10.2002 on a charge under sections 366 and 376, I.P.C. of P.S. Lalapur District Allahabad. The report in this respect had been submitted by Officer-In-charge Pooled Cars. The employee having been convicted for a period of 3 years and 7 years for offence involving moral turpitude was suspended vide order dated 23.10.2002 by my predecessor in office after perusing the first information report, medical report supplementary medical report and judgment which he called vide his order dated 22.10.2002. Subsequently after the grant of bail he applied on 31.10.2002 for reinstatement as also for grant of earned leave for the period from 21.10.2002 to 29.10.2002 but the same was also refused by my predecessor in office with the observation that he cannot be permitted to serve until he is exonerated/acquitted inasmuch as the offence for which he was convicted is of moral turpitude. About three and half months time has passed from the date when he was convicted. It is not in the overall interest of Government work to allow him to continue to get subsistence allowance without any work. Preliminary enquiry was ordered in respect of his conduct by my predecessor in office. Enquiry Officer has reported that prior to his employment in the year 1996 Session Trial No. 202/99 Crime No. 77/83 was already registered against him in which he had been convicted. He did not disclose the same. Beside this, another case crime No. 39/96 under section 307, I.P.C. was also registered against him but he was acquitted of the same prior to his employment. Officer-In-charge Pool Cars has given preliminary enquiry report. He has reported that employee Sri Sada Nand is guilty of concealment of facts aforesaid and also of his appearance in Sessions Cases before Court without permission. He has also reported that Sri Sada Nand Yadav has been convicted and sentenced to 3 years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 3,000/- for the offence under section 366, I.P.C. and 7 years rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 5,000/- for the offence under section 376, I.P.C. The cases indicate that the employee had criminal antecedents from the year 1983. The offence in which he has been convicted involve moral turpitude. He cannot be allowed continuance in Government service because of criminal antecedents. It is but natural that any Government Officer taking work would be scared of him. It is not known as to when his case will come to an end and whether he will be acquitted on bail or will be finally convicted. His services are temporary. The facts and circumstances in my opinion warrant that instead of keeping him in continuous suspension it would be better to terminate his services in accordance with rules after giving 30 days notice and to take some body else in employment so that Government work does not suffer and the Government is also relieved of unnecessary financial obligation. Let notice of termination of temporary service to Sri Sada Nand Yadav be given with 30 days salary in lieu of notice.;