Akhtar Husain Khan, J. - (1.) HEARD Mr. O.P. Srivastava, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Virendra Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for opposite parties.
(2.) PETITIONER , Ramesh has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against punishment order dated 20.1.2005 (annexure -1 to the writ petition), whereby he has been reverted from the post of Consolidation Officer to the post of Assistant Consolidation Officer with direction to record adverse entry in Character Roll withholding his integrity in year 2004 -2005. Learned counsel for petitioner has assailed impugned punishment order on following grounds: (i) That the whole disciplinary proceedings have been conducted in an arbitrary manner and against law. No regular enquiry has been conducted in accordance with procedure contemplated in U.P. Government Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1999. (ii) That the petitioner has not been given copies of relevant documents referred in chargesheet. (iii) That the second report submitted by enquiry officer is against law and without jurisdiction. (iv) That the charges levelled against petitioner are related to Judicial orders passed by petitioner in good faith and with due diligence. These orders may be erroneous but may not be act of misconduct. (v) That there is no allegation of corruption against petitioner. (vi) That the punishment awarded to petitioner to withhold his integrity is against provisions of U.P. Government Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1999. (vii) That the petitioner is entitled to protections provided by Sections 40 and 49A of U.P. Consolidation Act, 1953.
(3.) LEARNED Additional Chief Standing Counsel has supported impugned punishment order and has contended that chargesheet has been served on petitioner and petitioner has filed his written statement. Thereafter, enquiry officer has completed enquiry in accordance with law after giving full opportunity of hearing to petitioner.;