- (1.) PETITIONER , R.K. Gupta, is before this Court with the following prayer: (i) Issue or pass a writ, direction and/or order in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned judgment and order dated 23.12.2011 passed by the State Public Service Tribunal, U.P., Lucknow in Claim Petition No.1480 of 2009 : Ravindra Kumar Gupta vs. State of U.P. And others. (ii) Issue or pass a writ, direction and/or order in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent nos. 1, 2 and 3 hereto to pay Rs.20,00,000.00 (Rupees Twenty Lakhs only) to the petitioner in the form of damages together with a further sum of Rs.4,00,000.00 (Rupees Four Lakhs Only) as costs of the litigation undertaken by the petitioner before the civil court and the State Public Services Tribunal, U.P., Lucknow. (iii) Issue any other writ, direction and/or order in any other nature deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case including an order awarding the costs of this petition to the petitioner and against the respondents.
(2.) BRIEF background of the case is that petitioner joined services with the U.P. Public Public Works Department in the capacity of Overseer (now Junior Engineer) on 3rd June, 1972 and his submission is that he has continuously served the department to the best of his capability, ability and with utmost sincerity till he has attained his age of superannuation on 30th April, 2007.
(3.) PETITIONER has proceeded to narrate his story by submitting that while petitioner was posted as Junior Engineer under the Executive Engineer, National Highway Khand PWD, Lucknow, on 7th February, 2005 a departmental enquiry was initiated against him and simultaneously on the same date he was placed under suspension in exercise of authority vested under Rule 4 of U.P. Government Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1999 (hereinafter referred as "Rules"), and the Chef Engineer, National Highway Khand PWD, Lucknow was appointed as Enquiry Officer and petitioner was attached to the office of Superintending Engineer, 57th Circle, National Highway, Public Works Department, Lucknow. Petitioner at the said juncture being aggrieved by the order of suspension dated 7th February, 2005 preferred Writ Petition No.1184 (S/S) of 2005 and this Court on 14th February, 2005 passed following order: "Through the instant writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 07.02.2005, copy of which is annexed as Annexure No.1 to the writ petition, whereby he has been placed under suspension on the grounds indicated in the said order. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned standing counsel. With the consent of the parties the writ petition is finally disposed of at the admission stage. Without entering into the question of merit, it is hereby directed that the chargesheet shall be furnished to the petitioner by the opposite parties within a period of two weeks from today, to which he may submit his reply within a period of three weeks. The enquiry thereafter shall be conducted into the charges levelled against him and the same shall be concluded within a period of three months and final order shall be passed within a month thereafter. The petitioner shall cooperate in the enquiry proceedings. Till the enquiry is completed as aforesaid the impugned order of suspension dated 07.02.2005, as contained in Annexure No.1 as well as Annexure No.1A, shall be kept in abeyance. It is, however, made clear that in case of non -cooperation by the petitioner in the enquiry proceedings, the benefit of aforesaid order shall not be available to him. With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition stands finally disposed of." Petitioner has stated that thereafter he has served the copy of order dated 14.02.2005 on the authorities concerned and the said enquiry continued and on 9th March, 2005, he was informed by the Enquiry Officer that since the charges were personal in nature, the petitioner would have to tender evidence in support of his claim. On 21st March, 2005 petitioner filed reply of the said charge -sheet rebutting all the charges and by producing documentary evidence. Petitioner submits that thereafter Enquiry Officer held enquiry on 6th April, 2005 and thereafter Enquiry Officer submitted his report on 27th April, 2005 wherein except for charge no.2 all other charges were held to be proved. On 9th June, 2005, a show cause notice was issued and petitioner submitted his reply dated 14th June, 2005 and thereafter on 21st June, 2005, the suspension order was stayed but departmental enquiry was directed to continue. Petitioner's submission is that thereafter on 23rd June, 2005, he was asked to take over the charge and on 22.8.2005, an order of punishment of withholding two increments with permanent effect was passed and being aggrieved by the said order of punishment, Writ Petition No.7729 (S/S) of 2005 was filed. During this period petitioner submits that a second inquiry was initiated and he was once again placed under suspension in contemplation of disciplinary enquiry under same set of rules on 21st July, 2005 and once again Enquiry Officer was appointed to make enquiries against him. Petitioner's submission is that he has been on casual leave during this period and three orders were pasted on the outer wall of the house of petitioner. Petitioner submits that aggrieved by the second order of suspension dated 21st July, 2005, he filed writ petition no.4745 (S/S) of 2005 and this Court on 27th July, 2005 accorded interim order and he joined his duties on 29th July, 2005.;