GAJRAJ SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P
LAWS(ALL)-1984-1-77
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on
January 27,1984
GAJRAJ SINGH
Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH
Respondents
JUDGEMENT
K. N. Goyal, J. -
(1.) ADMIT.
(2.) AS only a short question is involved, we proceed to dispose of the petition finally.A disciplinary enquiry was initiated against the petitioner and as a result of that enquiry the punishment of compulsory retirement has been imposed upon him. No such punishment is prescribed in rule 49 of the U. P. Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules. Such punishment is prescribed in rule 10 of the U. P. Disciplinary Proceedings Tribunal Rules, but it is clear from the impugned order that in the instant case the charges were not referred to the Tribunal for enquiry. Accordingly the punishment imposed could not have been legally imposed. The impugned order could not also be treated as Ian order of compulsory retirement simpliciter inasmuch as it specifically refers to disciplinary proceedings and carries a stigma. The impugned order annexure 6 cannot thus be sustained.
The writ petition is allowed. Impugned order annexure 6 is hereby quashed. It will, however, be open to the competent authority to pass fresh order of punishment on the basis of the enquiry already held. Petition allowed. ;
(2.) AS only a short question is involved, we proceed to dispose of the petition finally.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.